Partly allowed

Raju Rai @ Raju Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Aug 2022CR. MISC./3591/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses a withdrawn anticipatory bail application regarding a land dispute causing assault under the IPC. The court dismissed the application for some petitioners as infructuous due to their arrest but granted interim bail conditions for others.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed as withdrawn for Petitioners 4 and 5; Bail granted for Petitioners 1, 2, and 3 conditional upon arrest or surrender within four weeks.

Raju Rai @ Raju Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3591 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-309 Year-2021 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran

¶3

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

¶4

RAJU RAI @ RAJU KUMAR Son of Daroga Rai Resident of Village - Shabalpur Chaharam, P.S. - Sonepur, District - Saran.

¶5

Pintu Kumar Son of Kapil Rai Resident of Village - Shabalpur Chaharam, P.S. - Sonepur, District - Saran.

¶6

Sanjeet Kumar Rai @ Sanjeet Kumar Son of Daroga Rai Resident of Village - Shabalpur Chaharam, P.S. - Sonepur, District - Saran.

¶7

Haribansh Rai Son of Late Ramshwak Rai Resident of Village - Shabalpur Chaharam, P.S. - Sonepur, District - Saran.

¶8

Dholan Rai Son of Late Baldeo Rai Resident of Village - Shabalpur Chaharam, P.S. - Sonepur, District - Saran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

2 11-08-2022

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

¶17

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that during the pendency of this anticipatory bail application, petitioner nos. 4 and 5 have been arrested and, as such, the same has become infructuous. He, therefore, seeks permission to withdraw this application as against petitioner nos.4 and 5.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3591 of 2022(2) dt.11-08-2022 2/3

¶19

In view of the aforesaid submission, the application is dismissed as withdrawn as having become infructuous as against petitioner nos. 4 and 5.

¶20

Petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 3 apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in connection with Sonepur P.S.Case No. 309 of 2021.

¶21

As per allegation, the accused persons were fixing pillar on kharanja. On protest, they assaulted the informant and his family members. The allegation against petitioner no.2 is that he assaulted the informant on his left hand. Petitioner no.1 assaulted Asarfi Rai and petitioner no.3 also assaulted Asarfi Rai with iron rod.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is land dispute between the parties. The injuries suffered by the informant’s side are simple in nature, caused by hard and blunt substance. He has also submitted that the members of the defense side were also injured and in this respect an application was made to the concerned SHO, but he did not register the case.

¶23

Considering the above facts and circumstances, let petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 3, above-named, in the event of their

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3591 of 2022(2) dt.11-08-2022 3/3

¶25

arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of communication of this order, 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 CJM, Saran in connection with Sonepur P.S.Case No. 309 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C.

¶26

Office shall ensure that all the defects are removed by the petitioners within the stipulated time provided hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

¶27

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶28

HR/-

¶29

U t

Raju Rai @ Raju Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Rai @ Raju Kumar 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

Jitan Kumar @ Jivitan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bhulendra Bind @ Bhulendra Bin Vs The State of Bihar

Imteyaz Ahmad Vs the State of Bihar

Priti Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Gulshan Ray @ Gulshan Kumar Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Chaturbhuj Prasad Vs the State of Bihar