Petitioner released on bail after being arrested under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 326, 307, 379, 427, 504 and 506/34IPC: High court of Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 103421 Arising Out of PS. Case No. 77 Year 2020 Thana TARABARI District Araria Md Usman @ Usman age 32 years Male Son of Md. Sarif @ Md. Sharif Resident of Village Cherarni Ward No. 2 PS Tarabari District Araria The State of Bihar ... Petitioner s ... Opposite Party s For the Petitioner s Mr. Md. Ziaul Quamar Advocate For the State Mr. Yogendra Kumar APP CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 20 07 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 14.07.2021 which was allowed 3. Heard Mr. Md. Ziaul Quamar learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Yogendra Kumar learned Additional Public Prosecutorfor the State 4. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Tarabari PS Case No. 77 of 2020 dated 12.08.2020 instituted Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.103421 dt.20 07 2021 under Sections 147 148 149 341 323 324 326 307 379 427 504 and 506 34 of the Indian Penal Code 5. The allegation against the petitioner and others who were said to be variously armed is of assault on the informant and others. However specifically against the petitioner the allegation is of having assaulted on the leg causing injury 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation is general and omnibus against nine persons including the petitioner and is limited to the specific overt act of attack on the right leg that too along with another co accused. It was submitted that the injury report attributed to such attack shows that the same was simple in nature caused by hard blunt substance as there is only swelling on the right ankle joint. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It was further submitted that there is allegation against nine persons but only two persons have been injured i.e. the informant and his nephew and there is previous enmity. Learned counsel submitted that the Sarpanch has also given a certificate that the petitioner who is a tempo driver was at Forbesganj on the date of occurrence and was not present there 7. Learned APP did not controvert the fact that as per the allegation the petitioner and another co accused had assaulted Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.103421 dt.20 07 2021 on the right leg which has resulted only in swelling on the right ankle joint and is simple in nature caused by hard blunt substance 8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25 000 with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Araria in Tarabari PS Case No 720 subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and further and further i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner ii) that the petitioner and the bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good behaviour of the petitioner and iii) that the petitioner shall co operate with the police prosecution and the Court. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or failure to co operate shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds 9. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioner to the notice of the Court concerned which shall take immediate Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.103421 dt.20 07 2021 action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the 10. The petition stands disposed off in the (Ahsanuddin Amanullah J

Summary: This case is in connection with the Tarabari PS case no.77 of 2020 on the 12th of August 2020, the petitioner was arrested under Section 147IPC, “Punishment for rioting.”, section 148, “Rioting, armed with deadly weapon” section 149, “Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offense commit­ted in the prosecution of the common object.” section 341, “Punishment for wrongful restraint.” section 323, “voluntarily causing hurt” section 324, “Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.” section 326, “Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means” section 307, “Attempt to murder”  and sections 379,427, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. This judgment was given in the high court of Judicature at Patna by honorable Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah on the 20th of July 2021 in the case of Md Usman v/s  the state of Bihar criminal miscellaneous No. 10344 of 2021, Mr. Quamar represented as the advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Yogendra Kumar represented as the additional public prosecutor for the state of Bihar, the proceedings of the court were held through video conference. The following are the facts of the case, the petitioner, a tempo driver, and others were accused of being armed and assaulted the informant and others, the allegation was specifically against the petitioner as he assaulted the informant and caused leg injury and swelling on the right ankle joint caused by a hard blunt substance. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the injury which was reported was shown that the attack was simple in nature and was caused by a hard blunt substance that caused the swelling on the informant’s right ankle. The counsel for the petitioner held that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, the reason the informant and his nephew were injured was due to some enmity between the parties, the counsel further conceded that the petitioner was present at Forbesganj on the date of the incident and was not present when the injury took place and therefore prayed before the court to release the petitioner from the arrest. However, the additional public prosecutor held that the petitioner and the co-accused committed an assault on the right leg of the informant, which resulted in swelling and injury. Such an act comes under grievous hurt and therefore objected against the bail for the petitioner.  The court decided that the petitioner will be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the l Chief Judicial Magistrate, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. “(i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner and the bailors shall execute the bond and give an undertaking with regard to the good behavior of the petitioner and (iii) petitioner shall co-operate with the police/prosecution and the Court.”