Arun Giri And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26402 of 2017 (3) dt.21-08-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.26402 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -7 Year- 2017 Thana -PAHARPUR DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================
1. Arun Giri Son of Sri Chandan Giri
2. Rajan Giri son of Sri Virendra Giri Both the Resident of Mohalla- Giri Tola, Police Station- Pahadpur, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Gopesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 21-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Paharpur P.S. Case No. 7 of 2017 registered under Section 307 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code, section 27 of the Arms Act and section 3/5 of the Public Property Damage Act. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 was arrested by the police and petitioner no. 2 was only a member of the mob. Nothing specific has been alleged against these petitioners. Petitioner no. 2 has no criminal antecedent.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26402 of 2017 (3) dt.21-08-2017 the case, let the above named petitioner no.2 be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari in connection with Paharpur P.S. Case No. 7 of 2017 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C.
However, considering the nature of allegations levelled and the submissions of the parties, I do not feel inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner no. 1. His prayer for anticipatory bail is, therefore, rejected. (Arvind Srivastava, J) Manish/- U T