Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.6334 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Girish Singh 2. Guddu @ Jitendra Singh. 3. Pradip Kumar. 4. Biru Singh. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 02-03-2012 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . It is alleged that the informant has a market complex situated at Boring Canal Road where on 09.01.2012 at 9.30 AM the informant and her family members were standing, in the meantime, the petitioners along with 5-6 unknown persons arrived on two vehicles and demanded extortion of Rs. 50,00,000/- in order to pave way for vacating the shop. On refusal to pay extortion, petitioner nos. 1 and 2 started firing from their pistols, as a result of which Ashutosh Kumar sustained injuries and was taken to P.M.C.H. On hearing the gunshot firing, the mob assembled, when brick batting started and then the accused persons fled away leaving behind their two vehicles, which were Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6334 of 2012 (2) dt.02-03-2012 2 / 5 2 subsequently set on fire. The reason for the occurrence has been alleged to be the claim of the petitioners to develop the land of informant but the informants’ side had given the same to other developers. It is submitted by learned Sr. counsel for the petitioners, that the plot in question being Plot no. 466 is recorded in the name of late Kunj Bihari Singh and late Ram Niwas Singh, the grandfathers of petitioner nos. 1 and 2 respectively, but the husband of the informant made an agreement with some contractor for the development of his land which is situated behind the land of the petitioners. This fact gets proved from the map of Patna Municipal Corporation, as well as from the order passed in Demarcation Case No. 61 of 82-83, which has been brought on record as Annexure-4 but since the informant’s side had no way to reach to their land, hence on the alleged date of occurrence, they were fixing some gate on the land of the petitioners when the petitioners resisted, the informant’s side resorted to indiscriminate firing and two vehicles of the petitioners were set ablaze by the informant’s side, but when the police, in spite of information of the S.P., failed to register a case on behalf of the petitioners, then the petitioners lodged complaint Case No. 140 of 2012. A statement has been made in the petition that the petitioner has no Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6334 of 2012 (2) dt.02-03-2012 3 / 5 3 criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that at 9.30 AM on 09.01.2012, the injured was examined at Government hospital i.e., PMCH, when three lacerated injures, each of 1/2 inch X 1/2 inch size and one swelling were found, which negates the accusation levelled in the FIR, but when the informant’s side failed to obtain desired injury report, then they got a injury report from a private hospital i.e., Rajeshwar Hospital at 2.30 PM on 09.01.2012, being wound of entry of 1/4 inch X 1/4 inch and wound of exit of 1/4 inch X 1/5 inch, whereas the size of other wound is 1/4 inch X 1/5 inch, when it was suggested that under general anesthesia bullet was taken out. This injury report appears not only to be fabricated by difference of the size of injury as fond in the Government Hospital but also creates doubt about its genuineness which suggests no bony injury, but at the bottom, it has been stated that the opinion with regard to nature, time and cause of injury can be given by the Doctor at PMCH, who examined the injured initially. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner no.1 and 2 caused firearm injury and the bullet was taken out by the Doctor of Rajeshwar Hospital. Considering the rival submission of the parties and Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6334 of 2012 (2) dt.02-03-2012 4 / 5 4 perusing the documents on record, it appears that the occurrence took place on the land of the petitioners and both sides are on litigating terms from before, as gets reflected from the order of the Demarcation Case No. 61 of 82-83, contained in Annexure-4 series. The injury report of the Government hospital suggests injury of very superficial nature and does not suggest to be caused by pistol. The injury report of Rajeshwar Hospital not only further minimizes the size of injury but also does not depict whether the injured was admitted in the hospital even for an hour. Considering the injury report which substantially negates the accusations made in the back ground of the serious land dispute and the facts that the two vehicles of the petitioners’ side were admittedly burnt and there is counter version of the occurrence also, let the above named petitioners, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 12 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 the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna in connection with S.K. Puri P.S. Case No. 06 of 2012, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6334 of 2012 (2) dt.02-03-2012 5 / 5 5 The learned court below will accept the bail bonds of the petitioners on filing of affidavit to the effect that they will regularly co-operate in the investigation and on violation of their undertaking, the I.O., concerned will bring such fact to the notice of learned C.J.M, who shall pass appropriate orders accordingly. Amrendra/- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 447

Statute Text:
Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal trespass. Whoever commits criminal trespass shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.