Petitioners alleged of assault granted bail after establishing the grounds that they were only a part of exhortation and had not committed any overt act by themselves. The Court considered the matter and passed the order of granting bail keeping in consideration the act and that they had no other criminal antecedent. The Hon’ble High Court of Patna before Justice Mr. Ahsanuddin Amanullah in the matter Akhilesh Chaudhary and Ors. v. The State of Bihar[Criminal Miscellaneous No. 38228 of 2020].
The facts of the case were that the petitioners were apprehended arrest in connection to a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. It was alleged against the petitioner that he has committed the assault on the informant and other persons. It is specified that he had exhorted to kill on which the co-accused that he had attacked with Hasuli on the victim, who had sustained injuries on the neck and had fallen. Another co-accused has been alleged of causing injuries on the neck, hands, and back.
The Learned Counsel of the Petitioner has submitted that there exists a counter case for the same which has been instituted by the Petitioner’s son as against the informant and others under Section 342, 323, 324, and 504/34 of the Indian penal Code. The Petitioner’s side had suffered injuries caused by the dagger. Also, there exist no specific allegations against the Petitioner No. 2 and 3 and hence, they were just a part of the mob present during the incident. They further added that the only allegation against Petitioner No. 1 is that he had exhorted to kill but no overt act has been attributed to him.
The Additional Public Prosecutor contended that the Petitioners had a common intention of assaulting the informant and others. However, it wasn’t controverted that he had only been alleged of exhortation. Hence, no overt act has been alleged.
The Hon’ble High Court of Patna held,” Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the fact that the petitioner no. 1 is said to have only extorted others to kill the informant and there being no overt act alleged against petitioners no. 2 and 3 and all the petitioners having no other criminal antecedent, the Court is inclined to allow the prayer for pre-arrest bail.” The petition hence stood disposed of on the terms and conditions of the bail.
Judgment Reviewed By Nimisha Dublish