Garib Nath Prasad And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40064 of 2013 (2) dt.24-12-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.40064 of 2013 ======================================================
1. Garib Nath Prasad S/O Late Ram Ayodhya Prasad Resident Of Village Koili, P.S. Minapur, District Muzaffarpur.
2. Amrendra Kumar Abhay S/O Mahavir Prasad Resident Of Village Mahindrawar, P.S. Jandaha, District Vaishali.
3. Lal Bahadur @ Lalu Bhagat @ Lal Bahadur Bhagat S/O Late Baidyanath Bhagat R/O Village Kamalchak (Chakmal), P.S. Saraiya, District Muzaffarpur.
4. Sunil Kumar S/O Dev Prasad @ Kheyali Bhagat R/O Village Kamalchak (Chakmal), P.S. Saraiya, District Muzaffarpur.
5. Pano Devi W/O Ram Prasad Bhagat Resident Of Village Chako Chhapra, P.S. Saraiya, District Muzaffarpur.
6. Umesh Bhagat S/O Gudar Bhagat Resident Of Village Chako Chhapra, P.S. Saraiya, District Muzaffarpur.
7. Ram Sovit Paswan @ Sovit Paswan S/O Bansur Paswan Resident Of Village Jalalpur, P.S. Saraiya, District Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioners.
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL ORDER 24-12-2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Muzaffarpur Town P.S.Case No. 222/05 for the offences punishable under Sections 420 & 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. From the perusal of the complaint it appears that the dispute is with regard to inheritance and the family property whereby the allegations have been made by the complainant
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40064 of 2013 (2) dt.24-12-2013 mainly against his widowed daughter-in-law. It is also apparent from the complaint that a suit for partition has been filed and is pending at the instance of the widowed daughter-in-law of the complainant. There are no specific allegations against these petitioners in the complaint.
The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner no.1 is brother of the widowed daughter-in-law of the complainant and the petitioner no.2 is the brother-in-law of the said widowed daughter-in-law and the remaining petitioners are purchasers from them.
After considering the allegations and submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, let the above named petitioners be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection with Muzaffarpur Town P.S. Case No. 222/05, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(V. Nath, J) Nitesh/-