Sahil Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34633 of 2018 (3) dt.02-07-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.34633 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -69 Year- 2018 Thana -MOKAMAH District- PATNA ======================================================
1. Sahil Kumar, Son of Sri Sudama Paswan,
2. Avinash Kumar Bhandul @ Avinash Kumar @ Sahil Kumar @ Avinash Kumar Bhundal, Son of Sri Sajan Paswan,
3. Rajani Manjhi @ Rajani Kumar, Son of Sri Suti Manhji,
4. Kundan Kumar Paswan @ Kundan Kumar, Son of Sri Rameshwar Paswan,
5. Bipin Kumar Paswan @ Bipin Kumar, Son of Sri Ravi Kant Paswan,
6. Arun Paswan @ Arun Kumar, Son of Sri Ram Bilash Paswan,
7. Dilip Kumar Manjhi @ Dilip Kumar, Son of Sri Sideshwar Manjhi,
8. Ram Briksh Manjhi, Son of Sri Sideshwar Manjhi,
9. Barun Paswan @ Barun Kumar, Son of Sri Ram Bilash Paswan,
10. Ajay Paswan, Son of Sri Sudarshan Paswan, all resident of Village- Hari Dayal Tola, P.S.- Mokama, District- Patna.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Manglam For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Ansarul Haque ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2018 Heard both sides.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Mokama P.S. Case No.69 of 2018 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 379, 354, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that while she was talking with her family members, the petitioners and other accused persons having armed with different weapons entered into her house and indiscriminately assaulted the informant and others.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34633 of 2018 (3) dt.02-07-2018 The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners happen to be agnates of the husband of the informant. On account of some political rivalry, the petitioners have been implicated in the case on false allegation. There is no specific allegation of assault against the petitioners but it appears that only because the informant and his family members did not cast vote in favour of one of the accused namely Bhushan Prasad, the accused persons including the petitioners entered into the house and indiscriminately assaulted the informant and others. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T