Ajit Rai @ Ajit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58502 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-506 Year-2021 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Ajit Rai @ Ajit Kumar S/o - Inarchand Rai, R/o Village - Manupur, Jahangir P.S. - Doriganj, District Saran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Kumar Yadav, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 13-09-2023 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sonpur P.S. Case No.506 of 2021 dated 30.08.2021, lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 302, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, the dispute has arisen between the informant and the accused sides with a view to torture the dog of nephew of Krishna Rai which was subsequently resulted into assault of informant side by the petitioner and others.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the contents of F.I.R., it transpires that the dispute has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58502 of 2023(2) dt.13-09-2023 2/3 arisen on a petty issue. He further submits that the informant and accused persons belong to same village and they are well known to each other but so far as the case of present petitioner is concerned, he submits that the only allegation against him is that petitioner and one Nitin Rai have assaulted the informant. There is no injury report of the informant and offence under Section 302 of I.P.C. has been lodged but specific allegation is against Krishna Rai and Prem Kumar Rai @Chhotu. He also submits that he has categorically taken this plea that the petitioner is not the resident of said village, rather he is son-inlaw of the village and he has visited to his Sasural for attending a ceremony and with a view to create pressure the F.I.R. has been lodged against him also. Learned counsel submits that the antecedent of petitioner is clean.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail but admits that it is true that petitioner is not the resident of the village, rather he is resident of another village and son-inlaw of the village.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioner be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58502 of 2023(2) dt.13-09-2023 3/3 (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge 5th, Saran at Chapra, in connection with Sonpur P. S. Case No.506 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Ritik/- U T