IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21344 of 2011 1. Ram Sreshth Mahto, son of Basdeo Mahto 2. Kari Mahto, Son of Basdeo Mahto 3. Sukhali Devi, wife of Basdeo Mahto All resident of Jata Pachhiyari tola, P.S.-Gaighat (Beniwad O.P.), District-Muzaffarpur. ……….Petitioners. Versus The State of Bihar ……..Opposite Party. ----------- 2/- 06.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 324 of 2010 registered for the offence under sections 147, 148, 149, 341,323, 324, 307, 379 & 504 of the Indian Penal Code, petitioners have prayed for grant of bail. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the informant got pointed and swelling injury on right forearm. There was fracture of ulna and the injury is opined to be grievous, whereas the other injuries are simple in nature on the wife of the informant, Kharesh Mahto and Laxman Mahto. Learned counsel for petitioners further submits that the said grievous injury is on a non-vital part of the informant and ingredients of offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code are missing. According to him, application of Section 379 I.P.C. is ornamental in nature. The grievous injury has been caused by hard and blunt 2 substance. Altogether 9 persons including 2 ladies have been made accused in this case. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the informant and petitioners are next door neighbours and apart from Section 307 & 379 of the Indian Penal Code case has been registered under other minor sections. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that since there are injuries caused upon four persons and, as such, the petitioners do not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail. Taking into consideration the fact that petitioner No. 3, namely Sukhali Devi is a lady, let the petitioner namely Sukhali Devi in the event of her arrest at the hands of police or surrender before the Court below, be released on bail in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No.324 of 2010 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur. However, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner No. 1, namely Ram Sreshth Mahto and petitioner No. 2, namely Kari Mahto. Accordingly, the prayer for bail on behalf of petitioner No. 1 & 2 is rejected. Sanjeet/- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)