The petitioners were released on bail, as the allegations were not corroborated by the material brought before the police: High court of Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.377321 Arising Out of PS. Case No. 114 Year 2021 Thana BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL District 1. Munni Devi Female aged about 39 years wife of Mr. Subodh Singh Rinku Devi Female aged about 37 years wife of Mr. Santosh Singh 3. Komal Kumari Female aged about 18 years daughter of Mr. Santosh Chhoti Kumari Female aged about 14 years daughter of Mr. Subodh Singh All resident of Village Mohanpur P.S. Muffasil District Begusarai ... Petitioner s The State of Bihar ... Opposite Party s For the Petitioner s For the State For the Informant Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur Advocate Mr. Md. Arif APP Mr. Nasrul Huda Khan Advocate CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 06 08 2021 The matter has been heard via video conferencing. 2. The case has been taken up out of turn on the basis of motion slip filed by learned counsel for the petitioner on 26.07.2021 which was allowed 3. Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. Md. Arif learned Additional Public Prosecutorfor the State and Mr. Nasrul Huda Khan learned counsel for the informant. 4. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Muffasil PS Case No. 1121 dated 23.02.2021 instituted Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.377321 dt.06 08 2021 under Sections 147 148 149 341 323 324 448 379 302 427 354 of the Indian Penal Code 5. The allegation against the petitioners no. 1 and 2 is that they assaulted the mother of the informant with iron rod and stick and also snatched the gold chain and ear ring whereas the petitioner no. 3 is said to have assaulted the sister of the informant with stick and thereafter it is alleged that all the accused including other male members of the family of the petitioner had entered into the house and looted Rs. 27 000 and further against the petitioner no. 4 is that she had also bitten the sister of the informant and all the accused are said to have damaged the motorcycle belonging to the father of the informant by iron rod and stones and had also taken away three mobile phones from the house. It is alleged that the father of the informant was killed due to assault by the accused. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that both the families were agnates and they have been falsely implicated. It was submitted that no reason has been assigned in the FIR for the occurrence whereas accused Santosh Singh of the present case has lodged Muffasil PS Case No. 1121 on the same day for the same occurrence where it is alleged that the informant of the present case along with his brothers had Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.377321 dt.06 08 2021 teased and harassed one of the petitioners and when the family members of the petitioners confronted the informant they were abused and assaulted along with other family members. Learned counsel submitted that the deceased is the own uncle of co accused Santosh Singh Subodh Singh and Randhir Kumar and both the sides are neighbours. Learned counsel submitted that the case is false also for the reason that there is no injury report of the mother of the informant and as far as the sister of the informant is concerned the injury report shows only one lacerated wound above left half upper lip 1” x 1 2” and no sign of bite was found by the doctor. Thus it was submitted that the injury itself appears to be superficial. It was submitted that the entire family including the petitioners who are female members having clean antecedent have been implicated with ulterior motive and as far as the death of the father of the informant is concerned the assault on him is attributed to the other male co accused and not the petitioners. It was submitted that another aspect of the matter is that in the FIR itself it is alleged that when other male members of the petitioners who are also co accused were assaulting the father of the informant the police had arrived and thus if the same is true then there could not have been any further assault on the father of the informant and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.377321 dt.06 08 2021 the accused would also have been arrested there itself on 22.02.2021 but neither any case was lodged nor arrest made on 22.02.2021 and only after the case was instituted on 23.02.2021 the male members of the petitioners who are accused in the present case were arrested. It was submitted that the informant side had blocked the state highway and indulged in brick batting with the police for which Muffasil PS Case No. 1121 dated 23.02.2021 under Sections 147 148 341 323 504 353 332 of the Indian Penal Code was also instituted in which the informant of the present case and others are accused 7. Learned APP submitted that the petitioners are alleged to have assaulted the mother and bitten the sister of the 8. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that the father of the informant has died due to assault. However it was not controverted that the assault on the father of the informant is attributed to the male co accused in the case and not the petitioners and also that there is no injury report with regard to the mother of the informant as also that only a lacerated wound on the upper lip of the sister of the informant has been found by the doctor as noted in the injury report. 9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.377321 dt.06 08 2021 the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties in the tentative view of the Court the allegations against the petitioners who have been made accused along with their other male members are not corroborated by the material brought before the police inasmuch as there is no injury report with regard to the mother of the informant and further that the sister of the informant has suffered only a lacerated wound above the left half upper lip and the petitioners are ladies without any criminal antecedent the Court is inclined to allow their prayer for grant of pre arrest bail 10. Accordingly in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs 25 000 each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Begusarai in Muffasil PS Case No. 1121 subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and furtherthat one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners that the petitioners and the bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good behaviour of the petitioners andthat the petitioners shall cooperate with the Court and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.377321 dt.06 08 2021 the police prosecution Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or undertaking or failure to cooperate shall lead to cancellation of their bail bonds. 11. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioners to the notice of the Court concerned which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner(s 12. The petition stands disposed of in the (Ahsanuddin Amanullah J J. Alam 

Summary: The petitioner apprehended arrest under Section 147 IPC, “Punishment for rioting”, section 148, “Rioting, armed with a deadly weapon”, section 149, “Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offense commit­ted in the prosecution of a common object”, section 341, “Punishment for wrongful restraint”, section 323, “Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt”, and sections 324, 448, 379, 302, 427, 354 of the Indian Penal Code. This is in connection with Muffasil PS Case No. 114 of 2021 dated 23.02.2021. This judgment was given in the high court of Judicature at Patna by honorable Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah on the 6th  of August 2021 in the case of Munni Devi and others versus the state of Bihar criminal miscellaneous No.37739 of 2021, Mr. Ajay Kumar Represented as the advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Arif represented the state of Bihar as the additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. Nasrul Huda was represented as the advocate for the informant the proceedings of the court were held via video conference. The following are the facts of the case, petitioner no.1 and 2 were accused of assaulting the mother of the informant using an iron rod and stick, and allegations of snatching gold jewelry was also made, petitioner no.3 was accused of assaulting the sister of the informant and all the petitioners along with the family members entered the house of the informant and looted Rs. 27,000 and petitioner no.4 had bitten the sister of the informant, the petitioners further damaged the motorcycle using an iron rod and stones and took three mobile phones from the house of the informant, the father of the informant was killed because of the assault committed by the petitioners. The counsel for the petitioner held that both the families were agnates. according to the FIR, no reason has been stated on why such an event took place, the accused has also filed a case against the informant Muffasil PS Case No. 115 of 2021 on the same day, as the informant along with his family teased and harassed one of the petitioners and when the family were involved and confronted the informant they were attacked, the deceased is the own uncle of the co-accused and the parties are neighbors. The allegations were falsely implicated because there was no injury report for the attack on the mother and regarding the sister, according to the injury report, only one lacerated wound above the left half upper lip 1” x 1/2” and no sign of bite was found by the doctor. All the petitioners are females and have no criminal antecedent they have been implicated with ulterior motive and the death of the father of the informant was caused by the co-accused and not the petitioners. The APP held that the petitioners were accused of assaulting the mother and biting the sister of the informant, counsel for the informant held that the father of the informant died due to the injuries resulting from the assault. However, it is not controverted that the assault on the deceased was done by the co-accused and not the petitioners and also there is no injury report for the attack on the mother of the informant. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case the Patna High Court held that “the allegations against the petitioners, who have been made accused along with their other male members, are not corroborated by the material brought before the police and as the petitioners are ladies without any criminal antecedent, the Court is inclined to allow their prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.”