Dismissed

Raja Kumar @ Raj Kumar Manjhi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Dec 2020CR. APP (SJ)/337/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected an appeal against the rejection of anticipatory bail. Finding that FIR allegations were supported by injury reports, the court held the appellants did not qualify for bail but granted them a window to surrender for regular bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail rejected; appellants ordered to surrender within eight weeks for bail consideration.

Raja Kumar @ Raj Kumar Manjhi Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.337 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-215 Year-2019 Thana- BASANTPUR District- Siwan

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Raja Kumar @ Raj Kumar Manjhi S/o Sri Bunilal Manjhi @ Munnilal Manjhi R/o village- Basaon Takhat, P.S.- Basantpur, District- Siwan

¶5

Vikky Kumar @ Vikky Kumar Manjhi S/o Sri Bunilal Manjhi @ Munnilal Manjhi R/o village- Basaon Takhat, P.S.- Basantpur, District- Siwan

¶6

Bunilal Manjhi @ Munni Lal Manjhi S/o Late Sukhram Manjhi R/o villageBasaon Takhat, P.S.- Basantpur, District- Siwan

¶7

... ... Appellant/s

¶8

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vyas Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Bipin Bihari Singh, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P. ======================================================

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 04-12-2020 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Spl.P.P. for the State through video conferencing.

¶12

The instant appeal has been preferred against the order dated 17.10.2019 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Siwan, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants in connection with Basantpur P.S. Case No.215 of 2019 registered under sections 341, 323, 324, 448, 354, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act), was rejected.

¶13

As per allegation in the F.I.R. seven named accused

¶14

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.337 of 2020(4) dt.04-12-2020 2/3

¶15

persons including the three appellants herein came variously armed with Lathi, Danda, Rod etc. started to abuse the father of the informant and it is stated that all of them started to assault the family members of the informant including her husband and father in law. It is further stated that the appellant nos. 1 and 2 misbehaved with the sister of the informant’s husband.

¶16

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. are false and concocted. Both the appellants as also the informant belong to the same caste. The allegations are general and omnibus in nature and the allegations as levelled against in the appellant nos. 1 and 2 of having misbehaved with the sister in law of the informant is not supported by the witnesses. It is submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

¶17

The appeal is opposed by learned Spl.P.P. for the State who submits that not only the appellants are named in the F.I.R. but have actively participated in the occurrence. It is further submitted that the allegations as levelled in the F.I.R. are supported from the materials that has transpired in course of investigation.

¶18

Case diary called for in the case has been received. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on

¶19

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.337 of 2020(4) dt.04-12-2020 3/3

¶20

going through the material that has transpired in course of investigation including the deposition of the witnesses as also the injury report of Arun Manjhi, Vikash Kumar, Saroj Kumari, Sanjay Manjhi, Seema Devi and Suresh Manjhi, it transpires that the allegations as levelled in the F.I.R. are supported from the injury reports. Thus the Court is not inclined to allow this appeal and the instant appeal is rejected.

¶21

In case the appellants surrender in the Court below within a period of eight weeks and pray for bail, the same shall be considered without being prejudiced by this order of rejection.

¶22

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶23

Bibhash/-

¶24

U T

Raja Kumar @ Raj Kumar Manjhi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja Kumar @ Raj Kumar Manjhi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Tufail Vs The State of Bihar

Satyam Jha @ Satyam Kumar @ Satyam Kumar Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Kumar @ Golu Thakur @ Jitendra Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Ramani Vs the State of Bihar

Mohan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sundeshwar Mahto @ Sudish Mahto Vs The State of Bihar