Madhav Kumar Verma @ Suchit Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69589 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-330 Year-2021 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa ====================================================== 1.

MADHAV KUMAR VERMA @ SUCHIT KUMAR VERMA Son of Radha Kant Verma Resident of Meer Tola, Ward No. 7, P.S. and District - Saharsa. 2.

Naveen Kumar Srivastav @ Navin Kr. Srivastav Son of Dina Nath Prasad Resident of Meer Tola, Ward No. 7, P.S. and District - Saharsa. 3.

Sudhir Kumar Srivastav @ Sudhir Kumar Son of Dina Nath Prasad Resident of Meer Tola, Ward No. 7, P.S. and District - Saharsa. 4.

Putul Kumar Srivastav @ Putul Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar Son of Dina Nath Prasad Resident of Meer Tola, Ward No. 7, P.S. and District - Saharsa. 5.

Banti Kumar Jha @ Raja Kumar Son of Gopal Jha Resident of Village - Batraha, Ward No. 25, P.S. and District - Saharsa. 6.

Parwez Alam @ Teni @ Md. Parwez Son of Late Israil Resident of Meer Tola, Ward No. 7, P.S. and District - Saharsa. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Nirmala Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 384 and some other ancillary Sections of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 27 of Arms Act As per the prosecution case, there is allegation of firing and demand of Rangdari against these petitioners.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69589 of 2021(2) dt.19-07-2022 2/2 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the case. It is further submitted that specific accusation of firing is against Banti Kumar Jha, petitioner No.5 but no one sustained any injury. On account of land dispute both parties are on litigating terms from before. There is case and counter case. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts of the case, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest/ surrender within a period of six weeks from today shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in connection with Saharsa Sadar PS case No. 330/2021, subject to conditions laid down u/s 438(2) of the Cr. P. C.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) BKS/- U T