IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.41200 of 2010
1. Purushottam Kumar,
2. Amit Kumar,
3. Manoj Kumar
All above sons of Shri Narayan Kumar, residents of
village- Parsauni Kapur, P.S.-Patahi, District- East
Champaran (Motihari). --- Petitioners.
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR--Opp. Party.
-----------
2/ 19-11-2010 Heard the parties.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a
criminal prosecution for offence under section 307/34 and
some other allied offences under the Indian Penal Code.
It is submitted that the petitioners are named in
the F.I.R. and there is allegation of assault against them
also besides others. It is also submitted that there is
counter version from the side of the accused persons, vide
Annexure-3. However, on close of investigation the police
has submitted final form vide Annexure-2 for offences
under section 341, 323, 325, 447 and 504 of the Indian
Penal Code, which all are bailable. In that view of the
matter, the petitioners were granted bail by the police in
terms of section 436(1) Cr. P. C. However, subsequently,
the learned Magistrate disagreed with the police report and
has taken cognizance under sections 341, 323, 325, 447,
504 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, this
application for anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the
2
prayer for anticipatory bail and has submitted that since
the petitioners had surrendered before the police and were
on police bail, therefore, the present application for
anticipatory bail is not maintainable. Learned counsel for
the State appears to be correct.
The present anticipatory bail application is not
maintainable in the facts and circumstances stated above.
However, there is no allegation that after grant of bail by
the police, the petitioners have misused the privilege of
bail. Similar matters came up for consideration before this
Court in case of Mahendra Prasad Singh Vrs. The State
of Bihar, reported in 2004 (3) PLJR 491 as also in the
case of Jagnarayan Yadav @ Babajee Yadav and others
Vrs. State of Bihar, reported in 2010(2) PLJR- 684 and
in those cases, it was held that though petition for
anticipatory bail was not maintainable, but once such
accused persons surrender in the court below, then their
prayer for regular bail was required to be considered
favourably.
In the light of the observations made in those two
cases, namely, Mahendra Prasad Singh (Supra) and
Jagnarayan Yadav @ Babajee Yadav and others (Supra),
the present application is disposed of with a direction to
the petitioners to surrender in the court below in
connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 13 of 2010, pending
3
in the court of learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate,
East Champaran, within a period of four weeks from today
and on their surrender, their prayer for regular bail shall
be disposed of in the light of observations in the judgments
referred to above.
Let this order be communicated through fax at
the cost of the petitioners.
( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)
BTiwary/