Arvind Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73832 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2022 Thana- NIMCHAKBATHANI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Arvind Manjhi Son of Late Jagdish Manjhi @ Jagdish Sharma VillageNatesar Tola Raja Bigha Also known as Rajendra Nagar PS-Neemchak Bathani District- Gaya 2.

Shahru Manjhi @ Shasharu Manjhi Son of Late Jagdish Manjhi @ Jagdish Sharma Village- Natesar Tola Raja Bigha Also known as Rajendra Nagar PS-Neemchak Bathani District- Gaya 3.

Arjun Manjhi Son of Late Jagdish Manjhi @ Jagdish Sharma VillageNatesar Tola Raja Bigha Also known as Rajendra Nagar PS-Neemchak Bathani District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Shekhar Anand, Advocate Mr. Mahendra Prasad Bhartee, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 02-12-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection with Nimchak Bathani P.S. Case no. 229 of 2022 registered under sections 307, 354B, 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 504, 506, 448 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that sixteen named accused persons including the three petitioners herein entered the house of the informant variously armed and started to assault the informant and her family

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73832 of 2024(4) dt.02-12-2024 2/3 members.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. Accepting the allegations in the F.I.R. for the sake of argument, the allegations of assault are not against these petitioners, though at the end of the F.I.R. the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are said to have resorted to indiscriminate firing. It is submitted that no person is said to have been injured in the alleged firing. Co-accused Tulsi Manjhi and Nitish Manjhi have been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 13.9.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. no.67967 of 2024.

5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against these three petitioners in the F.I.R., there being no specific allegation of assault as against them together with the grant of anticipatory bail to the aforesaid two co-accused, it is directed that the three petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Nimchak Bathani P.S. Case no. 229 of 2022 on each of them

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73832 of 2024(4) dt.02-12-2024 3/3 furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gaya. (Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T