Geeta Prasad Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2021 Thana- ANTICHAK District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1.

GEETA PRASAD MANDAL SON OF LATE SINDHU MANDAL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- ORIYUP, P.S.- ANTICHAK, KAHALGAON, DISTRICT- BHAGALPUR 2.

RAVI SHEKHAR @ BULBUL SON OF SACHIDA MANDAL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- ORIYUP, P.S.- ANTICHAK, KAHALGAON, DISTRICTBHAGALPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Navjot Yeshu For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Pandey Mr.Rajive Ranjan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 147/148/149/323/379/387/427/120B/504/506 of the I.P.C. As per the prosecution case, on 13.09.2021, while the informant was doing construction work, these petitioner alongwith other F.I.R. named accused and 25-30 unknown persons, armed with weapons, came and threw the bricks & stones and assaulted the labours & Raj Mistri. It is further alleged that on 03.10.2021, all the accused persons came to the house of informant and abused him and thereafter, threatened to vacate the land in question. The accused persons also demanded

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11 of 2022(2) dt.21-07-2022 2/2 a ransom of Rs. 25 Lacs.

It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case due to land dispute, for which, a title suit is going on between the parties, vide Title Suit No. 489/2007 (Annexure -2). It is further submitted that there is delay in lodging F.I.R. without there being any plausible explanation of delay, which creates shadow of doubt over the veracity of the incidence.

However, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Bhagalpur in connection with Antichak P.S. Case No. 37 of 2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T