IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.13647 of 2010 1. PARAS SAH son of Ram Chandra Sah, 2. Rajesh Sah son of Sri Paras Sah, 3. Dhunmun Sah @ Prabhat Kumar Sah son of Om Prakash Sah 4. Abhay Sah @ Abhay Kumar Sah son of Om Prakash Sah 5. Rameshwar Sah son of Ram Nath Sah 6. Hari Narayan Sah son of Rameshwar Sah 7. Vijay Sah son of Lakshman Sah 8. Kanhaiya Sah son of Ram Nath Sah 9. Barhmeshwar Sah son of Ram Nath Sah, 10. Harishankar Sah @ Hari Shankar Pd. @ Hari Sah son of Basudeo Sah & 11. Raju Sah son of Basudeo Sah Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3/ 21.05.2010 The matter has been taken up for out of turn hearing because the petitioner no.2 is going to be married on 5th June, 2010, and the Tilak ceremony is on 31.5.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, informant and the State. The petitioners seek bail in a case instituted for the offence under section 307 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner no.1 happens to be the father of petitioner no.2. Petitioner nos.1 to 9 were allowed anticipatory bail by this court also on the submission that chargesheet was not submitted against them. However, the informant moved the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the said order on the ground that in fact, chargesheet had been submitted against the petitioner no.1 to 9, and therefore, the order granting anticipatory bail was annulled and the petitioners were directed to surrender in the court below. With regard to the merits of the case, petitioner nos. 1 to - 2 - 8 are named in the First Information Report, whereas, petitioner nos. 9 to 11 are not named in the First Information Report. The prosecution case is that the accused persons variously armed assaulted the informant and his brother. Specific overt act of assault is also alleged upon petitioner nos. 2 and 7. It has been submitted that with regard to the same occurrence there is counter version given by one Bhola Nath Prasad, son of petitioner no.1, wherein, he has stated that he was assaulted by the prosecution party on account of which, he sustained injuries on his head and had to be rushed to the hospital for treatment. Further submission is that even though allegation is that injured Saryu Sah was assaulted by co-accused Sironi Sah on the head and thereafter petitioner nos. 2 and 7 also assaulted on his head and body, but only one grievous injury has been found on his person which is not specifically attributable to any of the petitioners and the doctor has not found any fracture on the skull. It is asserted that the informant and his brother Surendra Sah have sustained merely simple injury which fact is not controverted by the counsel for the informant present in the court today. In view of such, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar, in connection with Brahmpur P.S. case no.205 of 2006, subject to the conditions (i) that one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners, who will give an affidavit - 3 - giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioners. The bailors will undertake to furnish information to the court about any change in the address of the petitioners, (ii) that the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioners are implicated in any other case of similar nature after their release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse,(iii) that the petitioners will give an undertaking that they will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if they fail to do so on two given dates and delay the trial in any manner, their bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse, and (iv) that the petitioners will be well represented on each date and if they fail to do so on two consecutive dates, their bail will be liable to be cancelled. It has been submitted that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 were previously made accused in a case in which they have been acquitted, whereas, petitioner nos. 3 to 11 have no criminal antecedents. The same shall be verified by the court below before releasing the petitioners on bail. JA/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)