Lalu Sao @ Lallu Saw v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3179 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-337 Year-2020 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Lalu Sao @ Lallu Saw Son of Late Gariban Sao R.o vil- Gere Krishnapuri Colony PS-Mufassil Dist-Gaya 2.

Rubi Devi Wife of Lalu Sao R.o vil- Gere Krishnapuri Colony PS-Mufassil Dist-Gaya 3.

Pankaj Kumar Son of Lallu Saw R.o vil- Gere Krishnapuri Colony PSMufassil Dist-Gaya 4.

Navin Kumar Son of Lalu Sao R.o vil- Gere Krishnapuri Colony PSMufassil Dist-Gaya 5.

Deepak Kumar @ Dipak Kumar Son of Lalu Sao R.o vil- Gere Krishnapuri Colony PS-Mufassil Dist-Gaya 6.

Pappu Sao @ Amlesh Kumar @ Pappu Kumar Son of Narayan Sao VillLohjara PS-Wazirganj Dist-Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sharda Nand Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 07-02-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Gaya Mufassil P.S. Case No. 337 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 308/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation, while the informant was sitting at her door, all the accused persons having equipped with iron rod, started abusing and assaulting him and in consequence thereof, the petitioner nos. 4 and 6 are said to have assaulted on the head

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3179 of 2024(2) dt.07-02-2024 2/2 of the informant with iron rod, as a result of which, he sustained injuries.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. There is land dispute between the parties.

5. Considering the fact that there is specific allegation against the petitioner no. 4 and 6 to assault the informant on his head causing injuries, both of them do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail and accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

6. So far as rest petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 are concerned, they are having no specific allegation and hence in the event of their arrest or surrender, within four weeks from today, they are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-XIII, Gaya in connection with Gaya Mufassil P.S. Case No. 337 of 2020, subject to condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr. P.C. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T