Madan Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9938 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2020 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

MADAN MANJHI SON OF DHODHA MANJHI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MOHAMADPUR, P.S.- MANJHI, DISTRICT- SARAN. 2.

MUKESH MANJHI SON OF BHIKHARI MANJHI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MOHAMADPUR, P.S.- MANJHI, DISTRICT- SARAN.. 3.

RAJKUMAR MANJHI SON OF GANESH MANJHI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MOHAMADPUR, P.S.- MANJHI, DISTRICT- SARAN. 4.

MUNNA MANJHI SON OF MADAN MANJHI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MOHAMADPUR, P.S.- MANJHI, DISTRICT- SARAN. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-02-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 164 of 2020 registered for offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 379, 354, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9938 of 2021(4) dt.21-02-2022 2/3 that there is case and counter case and both the parties have sustained injuries.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail.

The allegation against the petitioners is that they alongwith other co-accused persons, badly assaulted the informant and his family members.

The specific allegation against petitioner Nos. 1 and 4 is that they assaulted the informant, who as per injury report sustained grievous injuries, as such, they do not deserve the privilege for anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner Nos. 1 and 4 is rejected.

So far as petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, there is allegation against them to assault the other members of the informant who sustained simple injuries, as such, their prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.

Let petitioner nos. 2 to 3, namely, Mukesh Manjhi and Rajkumar Manjhi, in the event of their arrest or surrender, within four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9938 of 2021(4) dt.21-02-2022 3/3 Judicial Magistrate-XIV, Chapra in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 164 of 2020, subject to condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr. P.C.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioners within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J) Mahesh/Kamlesh U T