Ranju Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63552 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2022 Thana- BIND District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.
RANJU DEVI W/o Late Bipin Prasad @ Vipin Prasad R/v- Vishunpur, P.S.- Bind, District- Nalanda 2.
MURARI PRASAD S/o Lakshmi Narayan Mahto R/v- Vishunpur, P.S.- Bind, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar No.III For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar Singh Mr. Anil Kumar No.1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 17-04-2023 Heard the parties.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 364, 302, 120(B), 201, 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegation, as made in the complaint petition is that the accused persons including the petitioners under a conspiracy detained the son of the informant in their house, where he was assaulted and killed. This came to the knowledge of the villagers and informant from a viral video clip on social media. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case due to village
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63552 of 2022(5) dt.17-04-2023 2/3 politics. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the occurrence took place on 17.01.2022 and complaint petition was filed on 08.02.2022 i.e. after a delay of more than 15 days without giving any plausible explanation regarding the said delay, which itself creates doubt about the prosecution case. The informant is not the eye witness to the alleged occurrence. The deceased was only found in the house of the petitioner as he has entered there without the permission of petitioner no.1. He further submits that from the perusal of the video clip, it is not found that the petitioners are also involved in the present case. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.
Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that the petitioners are involved in the alleged offence.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the case diary, it appears that there is no specific overt act against the petitioners, as such, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63552 of 2022(5) dt.17-04-2023 3/3 period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Bind P.S. Case No.86 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T