The petitioners were released on bail after being arrested under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 of the IPC and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.: High court of Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 141321 Arising Out of PS. Case No. 97 Year 2020 Thana NATHNAGAR District Bhagalpur 1. Dayal Yadav @ Deepak Kumar Male aged about 26 years Son of Bindeshwari Yadav @ Bindeshwari Prasad. Puran Yadav Male aged about 36 years Son of Bachcho Yadav Both are resident of Village Kishanpur PS NathnagarDistrict Bhagalpur The State of Bihar ... Petitioner s ... Opposite Party s For the Petitioner s Mr. Sandeep Kumar Senior Advocate with Mr. Arvind Kumar Advocate Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma APP For the State CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 26 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 petitioners which was 3. Heard Mr. Sandeep Kumar learned senior counsel along with Mr. Arvind Kumar learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma learned Additional Public Prosecutorfor the State 4. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Nathnagar PS Case No. 97 of 2020 dated Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.141321 dt.26 08 2021 13.02.2020 instituted under Sections 147 148 149 307 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act 1959 5. The allegation against the petitioners who are among 10 named and 19 unknown persons is that they were part of two groups who were indulging in firing at each other and when the police reached the spot they had run away and from the spot one empty cartridge of .315 bore was recovered 6. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the FIR is totally erroneous since it cannot be believed that when there is incriminate firing between two sides only one empty cartridge would be recovered. Further learned senior counsel submitted that when the informant who is the SHO himself and had gone with other police constables it is unbelievable that they would not been able to catch even one person though it was 3:50 PM in the afternoon in full day light. It was submitted that even the identification of 10 persons who are named including the petitioners is doubtful as in the FIR itself it has been stated that during the course of enquiry the names had transpired but no source has been indicated. Learned senior counsel submitted that the FIR is not based on any cogent evidence and is absolutely vague and general. It was submitted that the petitioner no. 1 has one other criminal case against him Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.141321 dt.26 08 2021 being Nathnagar PS Case No. 129 of 2020 whereas petitioner no. 2 does not have any criminal antecedent. It was further submitted that no injury has been caused to any 7. Learned APP submitted that the petitioners are named in the FIR. However it was not controverted that there is recovery of only one empty cartridge of .315 bore and there is no injury alleged to any person 8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties there being recovery of just one empty cartridge and no injury caused to any person the Court is inclined to allow the prayer for pre arrest 9. 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 twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM I Bhagalpur in NathnagarPS Case No. 920 subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and further that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners that the petitioners Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.141321 dt.26 08 2021 and the bailors shall execute bond with regard to good behaviour of the petitioners andthat the petitioners shall also give an undertaking to the Court that they shall not indulge in any illegal criminal activity act in violation of any law statutory provisions tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking shall lead to cancellation of their bail bonds. The petitioners shall cooperate in the case and be present before the Court on each and every date. Failure to cooperate or being absent on two consecutive dates without sufficient cause shall also lead to cancellation of their bail bonds 10. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions 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 petitioners 11. The petition stands disposed of in the (Ahsanuddin Amanullah J

Summary: The petitioner was taken into custody under Sections 147, “ 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 307 of the Indian Penal Code, “Attempt to murder”, and section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, “Punishment for using arms, whoever uses any arms or ammunition in contravention of section 5 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.” This present petition is connected with Nathnagar (Madhusudanpur) PS Case No. 97 of 2020. In the high court of Judicature at Patna, this judgment was given by honorable Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah on the 26th of August 2021 in the case of Dayal Yadav @ Deepak Kumar and others versus the state of Bihar criminal miscellaneous No. 14137 of 2021 Mr. Sandeep Kumar, represented as the advocate for the petitioner, and Mr. Lakshmi Sharma represented the state of Bihar as the additional Public Prosecutor, the proceedings of the court were held via video conference. The following are the facts of the case, the petitioners were accused of being part of two groups who were using illegal arms and indulged in firing at each other and when the police arrived at the spot, the groups which included the petitioners had run away from the spot possessing an empty cartridge of .315 bore was recovered. The counsel representing the petitioner held that the FIR that was filed made no sense and cannot be relied upon since if there is incriminate firing between two groups how come only one empty cartridge is found. further, the counsel held that the informant approached many police constables and an SHO (station house officer) himself it is not believable that he could not catch even one person as the incident took place in the afternoon in full daylight. However, the identification of the 10 petitioners was based on assumption as the names of the petitioners were transpired during the course of inquiry they were accused and no valuable source has been indicated. And the counsel held that the FIR is vague and general and not based on any cogent evidence and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent and there has been no injury caused to any person. The additional public prosecutor held that the petitioners have been in custody as their names were present in the FIR. However, the APP held that it is not controverted that this recovery of only one empty cartridge of .315 bore and there is no injury alleged to any person. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case the court held that “since there is the recovery of just one empty cartridge and no injury caused to any person, the Court is inclined to allow the prayer for pre-arrest bail. The petitioners will be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty-five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM -I, in connection with PS Case No. 97 of 2020, under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.1973, (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners, (ii) that the petitioners and the bailors shall execute bond with regard to the good behavior of the petitioners, and (iii) that the petitioners shall also give an undertaking to the Court that they shall not indulge in any illegal/criminal activity. The petition stands disposed of in the aforementioned terms.”