Raj Vansh Pandey And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.80811 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-360 Year-2018 Thana- DURGAWATI District- Bhabhua (Kaimur) ======================================================
1. Raj Vansh Pandey son of Late Mushan Pandey
2. Santosh Pandey son of Raj Vansh Pandey
3. Malati Devi wife of Raj Vansh Pandey All Resident of village Chaw P.S. Durgawati Distt.- Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nityanand Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 25-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
In this case, the petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Durgawati P.S. Case No. 360 of 2018 registered for offences under sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It has been alleged that the altercation took place on account of flow of drain water in which Ravi Vansh Pandey, petitioner no.1 came and assaulted the Informant with Lathi causing serious injury due to which the blood started oozing out and the Informant became unconscious. It has further been alleged that an ear-ring was forcibly snatched away by the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.80811 of 2018(2) dt.25-01-2019 2/2 petitioner no.3, Malati Devi.
Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners, 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua in connection with Durgawati P.S. Case No.360 of 2018, subject to 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 the petitioners 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