Opendra Mahto @ Upendra Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81623 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-226 Year-2019 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

OPENDRA MAHTO @ UPENDRA MAHTO S/o Jageshwar Mahto R/o village- Koriya Khas, P.S.- Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur. 2.

Mohan Mahto S/o Dahaur Mahto R/o village- Koriya Khas, P.S.- Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur.

3.

Sohan Mahto S/o Dahaur Mahto R/o village- Koriya Khas, P.S.- Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioners.

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr. Harendra Prasad, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 22-06-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State through Video Conferencing. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No.226 of 2019/G.R. No.1799 of 2019 registered under Sections 147, 341, 323, 307 and, later on, added Sections 148, 149, and 324/504 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, West, Muzaffarpur. The accusation is that 7 persons, named in the F.I.R., including the petitioners along with two unknown with an intention to kill the husband of the informant, caused assault to the husband of the informant. Thereafter, the husband of the informant was rushed to P.H.C. Paroo and, thereafter, he was referred to Medical College

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81623 of 2019(3) dt.22-06-2020 2/2 Hospital, from where he was sent to RBM Hospital. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that only two injuries, which are said to be grievous in nature, were found on the person of the husband of the informant. In fact, the petitioners and the informant are Pattidars and due to petty dispute, the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. However, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks from today and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T