Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Thakur v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86359 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2024 Thana- BUNIYAD GANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Thakur Son of Sudhir Thakur @ Thakur Dharmendra resident of Village- Naudhariya. PS- Buniyadganj, Distt.- Gaya 2.
Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Thakur Son of Shambhu Thakur resident of VillageNaudhariya. PS- Buniyadganj, Distt.- Gaya 3.
Dharmendra Kumar Son of Rajnath Thakur @ Rajnath Sharma resident of Village- Naudhariya. PS- Buniyadganj, Distt.- Gaya 4.
Rajnath Thakur Son of Late Tulsi Thakur resident of Village- Naudhariya. PS- Buniyadganj, Distt.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pintu Kumar Patel, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 18-01-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners and Learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable in connection with Buniyadganj P.S. Case No.95 of 2024 lodged under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 504, 506/34 of the I.P.C.
3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against seven named accused persons including the petitioners against whom the allegation is that the accused petitioners have assaulted the informant and his son which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86359 of 2024(2) dt.18-01-2025 2/3 caused severe injury to them and informant lost his conscious.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. He submits that from the contents of F.I.R., it becomes crystal clear that the dispute has arisen with respect to conflicts in the agricultural work and both are resident of same village.
5. Counsel further submits that antecedent of the petitioners is clean and all sections are bailable except section 307 of the I.P.C.
6. Learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and fairly submits that there is general and omnibus allegation against the accused No. 1, 2 and 4, but against petitioner No.3, there is specific role that he is instigator of the dispute.
7. In the present facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioner Nos.1 (Ranjeet Kumar), 2 (Suraj Kumar), and 4(Rajnath Thakur) be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86359 of 2024(2) dt.18-01-2025 3/3 Gaya in connection with Buniyadganj P. S. Case No.95 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. So far as the petitioner No.3 is concerned, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail, therefore, the bail application of the petitioner No.3 (Dharmendra Kumar) is hereby rejected.
9. However, trial court is directed to consider the regular bail application of the petitioner No.3, if he surrenders within 4 weeks from today and prays for regular bail, then trial court shall pass order without being prejudice of the present order preferably on the same day.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T