IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.10389 of 2010 1. MALLIK PANDEY, SON OF SHAMBHU PANDEY. 2. MANOJ PANDEY, SON OF SHAMBHU PANDEY. BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-MIRPUR, P.S. CHIRAIYA, DISTRICT-EAST CHAMPARAN. …………………………………………...PETITIONERS. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR……………OPPOSITE PARTY. ---------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Vindhya Keshari Kumar, Senior Advocate. For the State : Mr. A.M.P. Mehta, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. S.P. Shaha, Advocate. --------- 2. 1.4.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State as well as the learned counsel for the informant. The petitioners are in custody in connection with a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that so far as the petitioner no.2, Manoj Pandey, is concerned, there is no specific allegation against him of assaulting specific person as there is general and omnibus allegation against him of assaulting the informant’s side. - 2 - Further submission is that the allegation against the petitioner no.1, Mallik Pandey, is that he had given a farsa blow upon the head of the deceased causing his death, however, post-mortem report does not support such allegation. It has also been submitted that the petitioner no.1, Mallik Pandey, is in custody since 18.7.2009 whereas petitioner no.2, Manoj Pandey, since 10.8.2009. There is a case and counter case and there is admitted dispute between the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the informant submits that the petitioners have assaulted the informant’s side and there is specific allegation against the petitioner no.1, Mallik Pandey, of giving a farsa blow on the head of the deceased and the deceased had died due to head injury. Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner no.2, Manoj Pandey, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the S.D.J.M., Sikrahana at Motihari, East Champaran, in connection with Chiraiya P.S. Case No.122/09. - 3 - Since there is direct allegation against the petitioner no.1, Mallik Pandey, of assaulting the deceased on his head, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner no.1, Mallik Pandey, for the present. As a result, the prayer for bail of the petitioner no.1, Mallik Pandey, is rejected at this stage. However, if so advised, he may renew his prayer for bail after nine months, if the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period. P.S. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan,J)