Mahesh Manjhi And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.27960 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -91 Year- 2015 Thana -GAYA MUFFSIL District- GAYA ======================================================
1. Mahesh Manjhi S/o Ramesh Manjhi
2. Ramesh Manjhi S/o late Ashok Manjhi
3. Amresh Manjhi S/o Ramesh Manjhi
4. Sukar Choudhary s/o Chhatu Chaudhary
5. Radhika Devi W/o Sukar Chaudhary All above 1 to 5 are resident of Village - Bahora, Bigha(Salempur), P.S Muffasil, District Gaya.
6. Kishori Manjhi S/o late Mallu Manjhi
7. Raja Ram Manjhi S/o Jagdish Manjhi Both 6 to 7 are residents of Village Surhari, P.S Mufassil, District Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. U.S.P Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioner are apprehending his arrest in a case instituted under Sections 147, 341, 323, 353, 427 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that when the father of one girl student namely Ramesh Manjhi got information that his daughter Gauri Kumari had sustained injury in her left arm in course of playing in the school then he with his other family members and villagers of the same caste came in the school and after abusing the informant brutally assaulted him to such an extent that he fell down and became senseless. The allegation is that in such condition the petitioner no.2 snatched gold ring and petitioner no.3 took out Rs. 5,000/- case and thereafter ransacked
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27960 of 2015 (2) dt.23-07-2015 2/2 the furniture of the school and further took away the amplifier, mike and radio kept in the office of the school. On behalf of the petitioner, it has been submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that prior to institution of the present case, the petitioner had filed a case on 2.4.2015 against the informant of the present case. The present case is nothing but instituted in retaliation to Annexure 2, on 3.4.2015.
On behalf of the State, it has been submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR.
Considering the aforesaid facts, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M.,Gaya in connection with Muffasil P.S.Case No. 91 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down u/s 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Sudhir Singh, J) singh/- U T