Raja Vishwakarma And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50576 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -185 Year- 2017 Thana -JAMUI District- JAMUI ======================================================

1. Raja Vishwakarma, son of Tulsi Vishwakarma, Resident of Thana Chowk, Jamui.

2. Vikky @ Vikky Ram, son of late Shambhu Ram, Resident of Bhukhar Mohalla, Jamui both P.S.-Jamui, District-Jamui .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dinesh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 17-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No.185 of 2017 registered for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 337, 338 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is a case of false implication of the petitioners. In the First Information Report, there is an allegation of assault by petitioner no.1 who was armed with Talwar and allegedly hit on the head of the informant, but injury report, as contained in Annexure-2 to the present application, would not show any wound caused by Talwar rather in the opinion of the doctor head injury has been caused by hard blunt substance which is simple in nature.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50576 of 2017 (2) dt.17-10-2017 Learned counsel further submits that there is a counter case also and there is police case in which informant is also named.

On the other hand, learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioners do not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.2 namely Vikky @ Vikky Ram, but so far as petitioner no.1 is concerned since the assault attributed to him has not been substantiated by the injury report, in case of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today, the petitioner no.1 namely Raja Vishwakarma is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No.185 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

The application with respect to petitioner no.2 is rejected.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Arvind/- U T