Ram Kishun Mehta @ Ram Krishna Mehta @ Ram Kishan Mehta And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.20863 of 2018 Arising Out of P.S.Case No. -2918 Year- 2015 Thana -COMPLAINT CASE District- ARRARIA ======================================================
1. RAM KISHUN MEHTA @ RAM KRISHNA MEHTA @ RAM KISHAN MEHTA, S/o Late Bindeshwar Mehta,
2. Tej Narayan S/o Late Maheshwari Mehta,
3. Kamleshwari Mehta S/o Late Bauku Mehta, All are R/o Vill.- Sukela, ward no.9, P.S.- Bhargama, District- Araria.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mantala Devi W/o Sri Kaleshwar Mehta, R/o Vill.- Sukela, Ward No. 9, P.S.- Bhargama, District- Araria.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Humayu Ahmad Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-05-2018 Heard.
The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.2918C of 2015 registered for an offence under Sections 341, 504, 323, 452, 380 and 354B/34 of the IPC. The allegation as per complaint petition is that these petitioners entered into the house of the complainant and assaulted the complainant. They also snatched the golden items as well as 20,000/- from the box of the complainant. It is also alleged that the accused persons took her thumb impression on two blank papers and threatened to kill if she disclosed the occurrence to anybody. It has been submitted that the husband of petitioner no.3
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20863 of 2018 (3) dt.07-05-2018 2/3 is full brother of complainant and they are at litigating term for the land dispute. After partition the petitioner no.3 got share in the landed property, out of which, he sold 600 squire kari land to petitioner no.1 which caused annoyance to the complainant as the petitioner no.3 refused to give any share in the consideration money. The allegation of snatching ornaments is only to make the offence.
The learned APP opposed the submissions.
Considering the nature of allegation facts and circumstances, prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed. Let the above named petitioners in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from today be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of ACJM-V, Araria in connection with Complaint Case No.2918C of 2015, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioners will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The petitioners shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make themselves available as and when required by the court and on the event of failure on his part to
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20863 of 2018 (3) dt.07-05-2018 3/3 appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail.
(Sanjay Kumar, J) B.Kr./- U T