Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10572/2017rejected

Binod Rai And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2017-04-07Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10572 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -96 Year- 2016 Thana -GANGABRIDGE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Binod Rai, aged about 28 years,

2. Pulish Rai @ Sunil Rai, aged about 32 years, Both sons of S/o Sipahi Rai,

3. Harendra Rai, aged about 26 years.

4. Bijendra Rai, aged about 38 years, Both sons of S/o Munarik Rai,

5. Shiv Shankar Rai, aged about 28 years, Vakil Rai, S/o Sipahi Rai, Resident of Village- Saraipur (Jamalpur Tola), P.S.- Gangabridge, DistrictVaishali. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Satya Prakash Sinha, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party : Mr. Mukeshwar Dayal, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 07-04-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Gangabridge P.S. Case No. 96 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Section 436 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code. The informant named the petitioners and alleged that the petitioners and others came to his house. Umesh Rai and Binod Rai sprinkled petrol on his house and Umesh Rai ignited fire. It is alleged that the accused persons also made indiscriminate firing.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10572 of 2017 (3) dt.07-04-2017 2/2 no specific allegation against the petitioner no. 2 to 5. The case has been compromised but from perusal of the FIR as well as the case diary it appears that all the accused persons came to the house of the informant and Binod Rai and Umesh Rai sprinkled petrol and set ablaze the house of the informant.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners above named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

The petitioner, if so advised, may surrender before the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and the court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) KKSINHA/- U T