Ratan Mahto And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.36205 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -31 Year- 2015 Thana -DEODHA District- MADHUBANI ======================================================
1. Ratan Mahto, son of Late Khelpatti Mahto,
2. Ramhit Mahto, son of Late Khelpatti Mahto,
3. Rambinay Mahto, son of Ghuran Mahto,
4. Dilip Mahto, son of Sonphi Mahto,
5. Ram Dulari Devi, wife of Ram Dayal Mahto, Resident of village- Deodha Madhya Noniya Chowk, Ward No.13, P.S.- Deodha, District- Madhubani.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Deodha P.S. Case No.31 of 2015 registered under Sections 147, 448,341, 323, 354B, 379 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that from perusal of the first information report it would transpire that the informant was a major lady and had established physical relationship with co-accused Ram Sharan Mahto out of her own sweet will. As far as the petitioners are concerned, there is no allegation that they exploited the informant in any manner. They have been implicated in this case only because they happen to be
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36205 of 2018 (2) dt.04-07-2018 2/2 close relatives of co-accused Ram Sharan Mahto. It is further contended that even during course of investigation the police did not consider to take them in custody and on notice they all had appeared before the police in compliance of Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
On the other hand learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. He submitted that the case is inter alia under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and the petitioners are evading their appearance for last three years.
Having heard the parties since there is no allegation of physical exploitation of the informant as against the petitioners, in the event of arrest or surrender in the court below within six weeks from today, they are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani in connection with Deodha P.S. Case No. 31 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./- U T