Ram Sakal Mishra @ Sakal Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66046 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-659 Year-2021 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

RAM SAKAL MISHRA @ SAKAL MISHRA SON OF RAMASHRAY MISHRA RESIDENT OF MOHALLA- KOLUARWA, WARD NO. 2, PSMOTIHARI MUFASSIL, DIST- EAST CHAMPARAN 2.

ROJ MOHAMMAD SON OF HAMID MIAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGESINGHIYA SAGAR, WARD NO. 1, PS- TURKAULIYA (BANJARIA), DIST- EAST CHAMPARA 3.

LATIF MIAN SON OF HAMID MIAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGESINGHIYA SAGAR, WARD NO. 1, PS- TURKAULIYA (BANJARIA), DIST- EAST CHAMPARA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Madhurendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 386, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 11.08.2021 at about 8:00 AM, these petitioners alongwith two other F.I.R. named coaccused, armed with country-made pistol, knife etc. came at the land of informant and demanded Rs. 15 lacs, as Rangdari and threatened him with dire consequences if he failed to pay Rangdari.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66046 of 2023(2) dt.18-10-2023 2/2

4. It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation of extortion and threatening is false and fabricated. It is further submitted that during course of investigation, the I.O. (investigating officer) obtained the order of D.C.L.R., Sadar Motihari, which discloses that the land in question belongs to petitioner no. 2 Roj Mohammad, who is descendant of Matijoli Raiyat and informant failed to produce any document with regard to land in question.

5. However, learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the rival submission of parties, materials available against the petitioners as well as gravity of the offence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioners is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T