Dablu Kumar @ Manjil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64597 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2024 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
Dablu Kumar @ Manjil Kumar Son of Birendra Ram 2.
Birendra Ram Son of Harhangi Ram 3.
Harendra Ram son of Sri Kishun Ram 4.
Narendra Ram Son of Sri Kishun Ram 5.
Sri Kishun Ram Son of Mukha Ram 6.
Aagman Kumar @ Agam Kumar Son of Parmeshwar Ram 7.
Parmeshwar Ram Son of Dimagi Ram, All Resident of Village- Torani PSkargahar District -Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajani Kant Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-10-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 379, 307, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No.163 of 2024.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 25.04.2024 at 07:00 AM he was going to purchase cement, rod etc. when fifteen named accused persons including the petitioners came and started abusing, on objection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64597 of 2024(2) dt.17-10-2024 2/3 the accused assaulted causing injury to Reena, Kiran, Dinesh and Manjeet on their body, neck and legs and snatched chain worth rupees fifteen thousand from Kiran Devi, while Narendra and Indal snatched rupees twelve thousand from his pocket, it is next alleged that earlier on 17.04.2024 the accused person had come to his house and had assaulted Mukesh, Ranjan, Manju, Manjeet and informant by Lathi and Rami, causing injury on head.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that allegation of assault is not specific. It is next submitted that if what has been alleged in the FIR is true then why no FIR came to be instituted with respect to an occurrence which the informant alleges to have been committed by the accused persons on 17.04.2024 which cast an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted at the cost of repetition that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and are not criminals.
5. The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64597 of 2024(2) dt.17-10-2024 3/3
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Judge-XIIcum-A.C.J.M.,IV, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No.163 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Prakash Narayan U T