Rangu Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.60481 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -257 Year- 2017 Thana -KARAHGAR District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================

1. Rangu Singh,

2. Dwarika Singh, Both S/o Late Sita Singh,

3. Indrawati Devi, Wife of Dwarika Singh, All R/o Village- Chilhili, P.S.- Kargahar (Sidhi), District- Rohtas.

4. Umashankar Singh, Son of Late Ramji Singh, Resident of VillageSaraiya, P.S.- Nasriganj (Kachchhawa), District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamla Kant Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nagendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 31-01-2018 The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in connection with Karagahar (Sidhi) P.S. Case No. 257 of 2017 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 307, 504, 509 and 341 of I.P.P. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioners prays for withdrawal of the present anticipatory bail petition with regard to petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 4 and submits that he may be granted liberty to file regular bail petition. The prayer is allowed.

The present anticipatory bail petition, as regards petitioner nos.1,2 and 4, namely, Rangu Singh, Dwarika Singh and Umashankar Singh, respectively, is disposed of as withdrawn with

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.60481 of 2017 (6) dt.31-01-2018 2/3 a liberty to the petitioners to surrender before the learned trial court and file a petition for grant of regular bail petition which is directed to be disposed of on the same day, considering the fact that the present case arises out of a case and counter case and both sides sustained injury.

The allegation in the present case is that on account of altercation between the parties, the accused persons are said to have assaulted the prosecution side resulting in grievous injury to some of the persons of the prosecution side.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as far as petitioner no.3 is concerned, there is general and omnibus allegation and no specific overt act has been attributed to her, hence she may be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the petitioner no.3 has a clean antecedent. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit and proper to admit the petitioner no.3 Indrawati Devi to the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court concerned within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, the petitioner no.3, Indrawati Devi, shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.60481 of 2017 (6) dt.31-01-2018 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Sasaram (Rohtas) in connection with Karghar (Sidhi) P.S. Case No. 257 of 2017, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) BTiwary/- U T