Parwati Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58475 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-897 Year-2024 Thana- WAJIRGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Parwati Devi, W/o Raman Yadav Resident of Village- Koriauti, PSWazirganj, Distt.- Gaya 2.
Raman Yadav, S/o Late Shri Yadav Resident of Village- Koriauti, PSWazirganj, Distt.- Gaya 3.
Sanoj Yadav @ Sanoj Kumar, S/o Raman Yadav Resident of VillageKoriauti, PS- Wazirganj, Distt.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anand Kishore Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 29-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Wazirganj P.S. Case No. 897 of 2024 registered for the offences under Sections 126, 115(2), 117(2), 118, 109, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bhartia Nayaya Sanhita.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that when he was coming from his field after cultivating rice, in the meantime, the accused persons, including the petitioners wrongfully restrained and assaulted him. It is alleged that accused Bipin Kumar assaulted him by means of an iron
2/4 rod causing head injury to him and when the father of the informant came to his rescue, he was assaulted by an iron khanti by co-accused Sanoj Yadav and the other accused persons assaulted him causing injury on various parts of the body, and thereafter they managed to escape.
4. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated and there has been no such incident as stated in the FIR. It has been submitted that the injury sustained by the informant side was found to be simple in nature. It has been further submitted that there are general and omnibus allegations leveled against the petitioners. While for the same incident, there was a counter case lodged on behalf of the petitioners' side. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioners and the informant side are agnates. It has been stated that petitioner nos. 1 and 3 have clean antecedents, while petitioner no. 2 has one criminal case against his name.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
3/4 within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Wazirganj P.S. Case No. 897 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial. (iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned. (iv) If the petitioners are found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of their bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in
4/4 case at any stage it is found that the petitioners has concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) manoj/- U T