Sugandhi @ Deo Raj Mahto @ Sugandhi Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60142 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-291 Year-2019 Thana- KESARIA District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
SUGANDHI @ DEO RAJ MAHTO @ SUGANDHI MAHTO SON OF BHAGWAN MAHTO VILL. SANGRAMPUR PS. KESARIYA DIST. EAST CHAMPARAN 2.
RAMADHAR MAHTO SON OF BHAGWAN MAHTO VILL. SANGRAMPUR PS. KESARIYA DIST. EAST CHAMPARAN ... ... petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the petitioners/s :
Mr.Priyesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 21-09-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 341, 307, 327, 354, 379, 447, 448, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, in short is that the accused persons came to the door of the informant and assaulted him due to which he received injury. The family members of the informant came for rescue were also assaulted by the accused persons.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60142 of 2023(3) dt.21-09-2023 2/2 that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case due to old dispute. They have committed no offence. He submitted that both the parties are Gotiya and there is previous enmity between them due to land dispute. There is a case and counter case between the parties. Members of both parties have sustained injury as alleged in a separate occurrence. He further submitted that the injury report has not supported the prosecution case. They are languishing in judicial custody since 15.07.2023 and 21.07.2023 respectively.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below in connection with Kesaria P.S. Case No. 291 of 2019.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) arish/- U