Jay Prakash Ram And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.54685 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1 Year- 2016 Thana -RAMGARH District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ======================================================
1. Jay Prakash Ram, Son of Ram Nagina Ram
2. Mithlesh Ram @ Mithilesh Ram, Son of Mahendra Ram. Both resident of Village- Dewhalia, P.S- Ramgarh, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua.) .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar Seth, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 23-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
Petitioners are languishing in judicial custody since 03.10.2016 in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 01/16 registered for the offence punishable under Section 307 and other allied Sections of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case is that the First Information Report named accused assaulted the informant and two others, but the injury caused on the informant has been shown to have been caused by one Shashi Ram. During course of investigation the other person Amit Kumar, who had sustained injury named petitioner no. 1 Jai Prakash Ram.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54685 of 2016 (2) dt.23-12-2016 2/3 petitioners that they are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case due to personal enmity and another coaccused Bhorik Ram has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 34353 of 2016 on 09.11.2016 and the injury alleged to have been caused by petitioner no. 1 on Amit Kumar has been found to be simple in nature. It is submitted that only general and omnibus allegation have been levelled against the petitioners and that petitioner no. 2 has no criminal history.
However, learned A.P.P. for the State submits that petitioner no. 2 also assaulted the informant side and both petitioners are named in the First Information Report, hence, opposes the prayer for bail.
Be that as it may, considering the facts and circumstances and submission of the parties, since the allegation of assault on the informant is upon co-accused Shashi Ram, let the petitioners, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabhua in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 01/16, subject to the condition that petitioners will appear before the court below during trial on
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54685 of 2016 (2) dt.23-12-2016 3/3 each and every date and failure to appear on two consecutive dates without assigning any reason would entail cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajesh/- U T