The Court granted pre-arrest to the petitioners as they were arrested under Sections 341, 323, 324, 379, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code: High Court of Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 33621 Arising Out of PS. Case No. 377 Year 2020 Thana MAJHAULIA District West Champaran 1. Awasar Dewan @ Asar Dewan aged about 29 years Male. Fariyad Dewan aged about 23 years Male. Reyajul Dewan aged about 26 years Male. Zazul Dewan aged about 19 years Male All of them are Sons of Md. Muslim. 5. Muslim Dewan aged about 68 years Male Son of Late Khader Dewan All are Resident of Village Dewan Toli Ward No.4 PS Majhaulia District West Champaranfor the State and Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma learned counsel for the informant Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33621 dt.17 09 2021 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that during pendency of the case petitioners no. 2 and 5 have surrendered and thus he may be permitted to withdraw the petition on their behalf 5. In view thereof the petition stands disposed of as withdrawn as far as petitioners no. 2 and 5 namely Fariyad Dewan and Muslim Dewan are concerned and is restricted to petitioners no. 1 3 and 4 namely Awasar Dewan @ Asar Dewan Reyajul Dewan and Zazul Dewan 6. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Majhaulia PS Case No. 3720 dated 01.06.2020 instituted under Sections 341 323 324 379 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 7. The allegation against the petitioners and others is of assault on the informant and his brother and specifically against the petitioner no. 1 that he had taken 1 kg. of apple from the cart of the informant and when he refused to pay he had abused him Further against the petitioner no. 3 the allegation is that he had taken away Rs. 4 000 cash from the cart of the informant whereas against petitioner no. 4 there is only general and omnibus allegation of assault without any specific overt act attributed to him Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33621 dt.17 09 2021 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners no. 1 3 and 4 submitted that the issue is trivial in nature and has been blow out of proportion with mala fide intention. It was submitted that the allegation as far as the petitioners are concerned is not of any assault on any person. It was submitted that there is no other criminal antecedent of the petitioners. Further it was submitted that even the injury suffered by the informant though attributed to other co accused is simple in nature 9. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner no. 1 had taken apple from the cart of the informant and not paid to him and petitioner no. 3 had taken away Rs. 4 000 cash and the petitioner no. 4 was also party to the general assault 10. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that all the accused including the petitioners no. 1 3 and 4 who are brothers had taken part in the assault. However it was not denied that against petitioner no. 1 the only specific allegation is of taking 1 kg. of apple against petitioner no. 3 that he snatched Rs 4 000 cash and general and omnibus against petitioner no. 4 Learned counsel submitted that though the allegation of assault on the informant is specificially against petitioner no. 2 who is no more a petitioner herein the same has resulted in damage in the skull and in the CT scan of the brain grievous injuries have been Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33621 dt.17 09 2021 found which are not reflected in the initial injury report on which learned counsel for the petitioners has relied though it was not denied that the same is specifically attributed to petitioner no. 2 who has already surrendered before the Court below 11. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties in view of the nature of the allegations as also that the petitioners no 1 3 and 4 do not have any criminal antecedent the Court is inclined to allow their prayer for pre arrest bail 12. Accordingly in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today the petitioner no. 1 namely Awasar Dewan @ Asar Dewan petitioner no. 3 namely Reyajul Dewan and petitioner no. 4 namely Zazul Dewan 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 Bettiah in Majhaulia PS Case No. 3720 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 said petitioners that the said petitioners and the bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good behaviour of the said petitioners Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33621 dt.17 09 2021 andthat the said petitioners shall co operate with the Court and police prosecution. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or failure to co operate shall lead to cancellation of their bail bonds 13. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions by the said petitioners to the notice of the Court concerned which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the concerned 14. The petition stands disposed of in the (Ahsanuddin Amanullah J

Summary: The petitioners apprehended arrest under section 341 of the Indian Penal Code, “Punishment for wrongful restraint”, section 323, “Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt”, section 324, “Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means”, section 379, “Punishment for theft”, section 307, “Murder attempt” and Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, “Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace”. The petition is in connection with Majhaulia PS Case No. 377 of 2020 dated 01.06.2020. In the High Court of Judicature at Patna, this judgement was given by Honourable Mr Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah on the 17th of September  2021 in the case of Awasar Dewan @ Asar Dewan and others Versus the State of Bihar, [Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3363 of 2021] Mr Nasrul Hoda Khan represented as the advocate for the petitioner, Mr Jharkhandi Upadhyay, represented the State of Bihar as the additional Public Prosecutor, and Mr Umesh Chandra Verma,  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, the petitioners along with others were accused of assaulting the informant and his brother, petitioner no.1 was accused of taking 1Kg. of apple from the cart of the informant and refused to pay and even abused him. Petitioner no.3 took Rs. 4,000 cash from the cart belonging to the informant and petitioner no.4 was accused only in general terms and does not have any specific overt act attributed to him. The counsel representing petitioner no. 1,3 and 4  held that this entire scenario is a trivial issue and has been blown out of proportion associated with a mala fide intention. After investigation, it was held that the injury suffered by the informant was simple. The petitioners are not associated with any assault and they have no criminal antecedent as well. The additional public prosecutor held that petitioner no.1 was guilty of taking away the apples belonging to the petitioner and failed to pay him the same and the and petitioner no.3 was guilty of taking away Rs. 4,000 cash and petitioner no.4 was party to this assault. The counsel representing the informant held that all the petitioners are brothers and had taken part in the assault. However, it is not controverted that the allegations are simple, general and omnibus. The specific allegation is against petitioner no.2 as he caused an injury damaging the skull and grievous injuries were sustained according to the CT scan however the petitioner no.2 is no more a petitioner as he already surrendered before the court. The Honourable Court concluded that “Given the nature of the allegations as also that the petitioners no. 1, 3 and 4 do not have any criminal antecedent, the Court is inclined to allow their prayer for pre-arrest bail. The petitioner no. 1, 3, 4 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate. Under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the said petitioners, (ii) that the said petitioners and the bailors shall execute the bond and give an undertaking concerning good behaviour of the said and (iii) that the said petitioners shall co-operate with the Court and police/prosecution. The petition stands disposed of in the aforementioned terms.”