Arbind Tiwari @ Arbind Kr. v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.52498 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2017 Thana- DARIHAT District- Rohtas ====================================================== Arbind Tiwari @ Arbind Kr. S/o Ram Keshwar Tiwari, R/o Village- Paduhar, P.S.- Darihat, District- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. SURENDRA KUMAR, Advocate For the informant : Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-11-2017 On 09.11.2017 when the matter was taken up out of turn on the request of counsel for the petitioner and order was passed but subsequently learned counsel for the informant stated that without his consent and without any information matter was heard and as such order passed was recalled and the matter was directed to be placed under the heading 'To Be Mentioned' on 13.11.2017.

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the informant and counsel the State.

This is an application for regular bail in connection with Darihat P. S. No. 60 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 325, 504, 506, 386 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation, as per informant, is that he is running Gayatri ITI in the premises, which has been taken on lease from one Rama Kant Tiwary. On 11.08.2017, Arbind Tiwari, Ravi Tiwari, Shashi Tiwari and Ravi Ranjan Tiwari, all sons of Rameshwar Tiwari, entered into his institute and demanded Rs.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52498 of 2017(3) dt.13-11-2017 2/2 35 lacs as a ransom from the informant.

It has been contended by learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that there is dispute with regard to partition of joint family property and the ITI running by the informant is in the share of petitioner which is disputed by the counsel for informant. There is dispute between the parties with respect to share in joint family property. It is further contended that coaccused, namely, Ravi Tiwari @ Ravi Kant Tiwari, has already been admitted to bail on 18.10.2017 in Cr. Misc. No. 50780 of 2017.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM, Dehrion-Sone in connection with Darihat P. S. Case no. 60 of 2017. (S. Kumar, J) sudip/- U T