Blog

The petitioners were arrested under Section 341 IPC, “Punishment for wrongful restraint”, section 323, “Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt”, section 379, “Punishment for theft”, section 307, “Attempt to murder”, and sections 354(A), 447 and 427/34 of the Indian Penal Code. This is in connection with Mehsi PS Case No. 150 of 2020 dated 31.05.2020.

The high court of Judicature at Patna with honorable Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah on the 10^th  of August 2021 in the case of Ranjeet Rai and others versus the state of Bihar criminal miscellaneous No. 20673 of 2021, Dr. Alok Kumar Represented as the advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Mukeshwar 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 allegations against the petitioners along with 11 others were that they assaulted the informant and his wife and son and were accused of snatching gold mangalsutra and disrobing her and further the petitioner entered into the house of the informant and ransacked the household articles and took away Rs. 25,000.

The counsel for the petitioners submitted that these allegations are general and omnibus against the parties and they are agnates. The petitioners were accused of assaulting the informant, which caused his nose to bleed, disrobed his wife, and snatched her gold mandalsutra. The articles stolen were cosmetic in nature. And only the co-accused was said to have assaulted the informant’s son on his head with a farsa which is serious and the injury on the informant was simple in nature.

According to the FIR, an altercation arose when the petitioner was burning garbage and this was disturbing the informants and when they asked for extinguishment the same incident arose. The co-accused also filed for a case Mehsi PS Case No. 138 of 2020 against the informant stating that there was an exchange of hot words and there was a scuffle. The petitioners were involved because they were related to the co-accused by they were not present at the house on the date of the incident and the allegations against the petitioners were all general and omnibus and further petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

The APP held that the petitioners were also accused of assault on the son of the informant and the son suffered from grievous injuries on his head. However, the APP has not controverted that the allegations against the petitioners are general and omnibus while as it is specifically against the co-accused.

After considering the case’s facts and circumstances, the court held that “the petitioners will 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 ACJM 6, in Mehsi PS Case No. 150 of 2020, under Section 438(2) 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 the bond and give undertaking concerning good behavior of the petitioners and (iii) that they 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. The petition stands disposed of in the aforementioned terms.”

Click here to read the judgment