Mangal Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79182 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-343 Year-2018 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Mangal Chaudhary, aged about 31 years, Male, S/o Lallu Chaudhary R/o village- Bhui Tola, P.S.- Dinara, District- Rohtas 2.

Lallu Chaudhary, aged about 50 years, Male, S/o Late Dudhnath Chaudhary R/o village- Bhui Tola, P.S.- Dinara, District- Rohtas 3.

Geeta Chaudhary @ Geeta Devi, aged about 41 years, Female, W/o Lallu Chaudhary R/o village- Bhui Tola, P.S.- Dinara, District- Rohtas 4.

Pultan Chaudhary, aged about 26 years, Male, S/o Lallu Chaudhary R/o village- Bhui Tola, P.S.- Dinara, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ashraf Ansari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dinara P.S. Case No. 343 of 2018 registered for offences under sections 341, 323, 324, 354(b), 379, 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. An allegation has been made that earlier the Informant had lodged a case against the accused persons and, for settling the same, the accused persons were coercing the wife of the Informant, when she did not agree for compromise,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79182 of 2019(2) dt.11-12-2019 2/3 the petitioner no.1 Mangal Choudhary assaulted her by fist and slap. When her younger son came there to rescue his mother, then the petitioner no.2 Lallu Chaudhary assaulted him by Lathi on his head. The petitioner no.3 and 4, namely, Geeta Devi and Pulton Choudhary entered into the house of the Informant and taken away the jewellery.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that all are the concocted story. There is a case and counter case between the parties.

Looking to the specific allegation of assault made against the petitioner nos.1 and 2, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the them. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner nos. 1 & 2, above named, is rejected. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner nos. 3 & 4, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, 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 SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas in connection with Dinera P.S. Case No. 343 of 2018, subject to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79182 of 2019(2) dt.11-12-2019 3/3 the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also subject to condition that whenever the police will call them for investigation/interrogation, they will remain present and if they would not present themselves, the privilege of grant of anticipatory bail shall be deemed to have been canceled. (Shivaji Pandey, J) rishi/- U T