PATNA, India, June 10 -- Patna High Court issued the following order on May 12:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to make necessary correction in the prayer portion of the bail application.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Piprahi P.S. Case No. 190 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126, 115(2), 352, 109, 303(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
5. Allegedly, the petitioners along with other accused persons entered into the grocery shop of the informant and started abusing him. On protest being made, it is specifically alleged that co-accused Abodh Rai and Raushan Kumar assaulted him by means of iron rod. The petitioners also assaulted the informant by means of lathi and danda. There is further allegation of looting away the valuables of worth Rs. 1,10,000/-.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that even as per the FIR, the specific allegation has been attributed against co-accused Abodh Rai and Raushan Kumar. So far the petitioners are concerned, save and except the allegation that they were also present at the place of occurrence with lathi and danda, there is no allegation that on which part of the body, they have assaulted the informant. Both the parties are in fact close agnates and on account of some trifle, they entered into scuffle, leading to case and counter case bearing Piprahi P.S. Case No.191/2024 registered by the petitioner no.2 against the informant and his family members. Further contention has also been made that prior to the institution of present case, coaccused Abodh Rai has also filed an informatory petition before the S.D.M., Sheohar regarding threatenings being meted out to him of false implication. It is lastly contended that even if the allegation is taken to be true, for a moment, no case much less under Section 109 of the I.P.C. is made out against the petitioners. So far the other Sections of the I.P.C. are concerned, the same are found to be bailable. Moreover, the petitioners bear fare antecedent.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that on account of assault over the head of the informant, he has sustained grievous injury; all the more, the petitioners have actively participated in the crime.
8. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that grievous injury sustained to the informant is attributable to the co-accused Abodh Rai and Raushan Kumar, coupled with the case and counter case and the fact that both the parties are agnates and there is pending dispute, apart from the fare antecedents of the petitioners, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Sheohar in connection with Piprahi P.S. Case No. 190 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS., with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
