Ayodhya Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71333 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-276 Year-2019 Thana- SHIVSAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Ayodhya Singh Son of Late Chhakauri Singh Resident of Village - Pakariya, P.S.- Sheo Sagar, District - Rohtas.

2.

Sunil Singh @ Sunil Kumar Son of Ayodhya Singh Resident of Village - Pakariya, P.S.- Sheo Sagar, District - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 20-11-2019 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Sheosagar PS case no. 276 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 354 and other sections of Indian Penal Code.

The allegation is regarding the petitioners herein, who are father and son having assaulted the husband of the informant resulting in the husband of the informant being inflicted with various injuries, which is apparent from the impugned order dated 15.10.2019.

At this juncture, the learned counsel for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71333 of 2019(2) dt.20-11-2019 2/3 petitioners seek to withdraw the present petition qua the petitioner no. 2. Hence, the present petition stands dismissed as far as the petitioner no. 2 is concerned.

As far as the petitioner no. 1 is concerned, the learned counsel submits that there is only one grievous injury and the same can be said to be attributable to the son of the petitioner no. 1 and infact, the petitioner no. 1 is a government servant and he is working at Jharkhand, hence it is not probable that he had taken part in the alleged incident. The petitioner no. 1 is said to be having a clean antecedent.

The learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstance of the case, I deem it fit and appropriate to admit the petitioner no. 1 to the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioner no. 1, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Sheosagar PS case no. 276 of 2019

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71333 of 2019(2) dt.20-11-2019 3/3 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T