Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77747 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2019 Thana- DHARHARA District- Munger ====================================================== 1.

Pintu Kumar Son of Subhash Ram Village -Amari PS- Dharhara Distt -Munger 2.

Sintu Kumar son of Subhash Ram Village -Amari PS- Dharhara Distt -Munger 3.

Kundan Kumar son of Vijay Ram Village -Amari PS- Dharhara Distt -Munger 4.

Nandan Kumar son of Vijay Ram Village -Amari PS- Dharhara Distt -Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Kamal Nayan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 26-11-2024

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Dharhara Police Station Case No. 160 of 2019, disclosing offences under Sections 341, 323, 354(B), 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution story, on 07.06.2019, at about 8 P.M., the daughters of the informant namely Lakshmi Kumari and Puja Kumari were returning home after purchasing some groceries. In the meanwhile, petitioners started assaulting the daughters of the informant and also teased them. They also torn the cloths of the daughters of the informant in order to outrage their modesty. Upon cry, the informant along with her husband came to save her daughter and upon objection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77747 of 2024(2) dt.26-11-2024 2/3 petitioners started assaulting the informant and her husband and also threatened the informant.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of dirty village politics. He next submits that petitioners and the informant are co-villagers. He next submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioners and the allegations, levelled against the petitioners, are general and omnibus in nature. The husband of the informant has not been made charge sheeted witness. He next submits that petitioners were given advantage of Section 41(1) of Cr.P.C and they cooperated the police during investigation. The police after investigation submitted charge sheet and learned magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence. The petitioners are having reasonable apprehension that they may be taken into custody upon surrender.

5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that charge sheet has been submitted and petitioners have apprehension that they may be taken into custody, I am inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. This application is, accordingly, allowed.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77747 of 2024(2) dt.26-11-2024 3/3

7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Munger, in connection with Dharhara Police Station Case No. 160 of 2019, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U T