Surendra Mandal vs State Of Bihar

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, learned APP for the State.

The petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 260 of 2020 registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 379, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the prosecution story, 13 named accused persons lashed with lathi, danda, dabiya and garasa

including this petitioner came at the door of the informant and started abusing the informant and her family. On this the husband of the informant came

and forbade them to abuse then co-accused Jai Krishna Mandal assaulted him with farsa on the head and he fell down. It is further alleged that this

petitioner and other co-accused persons Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10762 of 2021(2) dt.14-06-2021 started assaulting the husband of the

informant indiscriminately with lathi, danda, farsa and dabiya. When the family members of the informant came to save her husband they assaulted

them and looted articles from the house and fled away The husband of the informant and other injured were taken to hospital but the husband of the

informant succumbed to the injuries.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there

are general and omnibus kind of allegations against the petitioner. It is further submitted that there is no specific allegation of causing any assault. The

petitioner is in custody since 01.09.2020 having no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case wherein this Court has noticed that in the First Information Report although 13 persons have

been named as accused who have allegedly participated in the occurrence but the informant has given specific names of the persons who have

assaulted her husband by 'dabia' and to her son. This Court has also noticed that specific names have been mentioned in the FIR as to who Patna

High Court CR. MISC. No.10762 of 2021(2) dt.14-06-2021 injured whom, so far as this petitioner is concerned, there is no specific allegation that this

petitioner was having dabia in his hand and at the same time there is no specific allegation that this petitioner had assaulted the deceased and the

injured, there are general and omnibus kind of allegations against the petitioner and it is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that he has

been falsely implicated in this case being neighbour with the aid of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, there being no criminal antecedent and the

petitioner has remained in jail since 01.09.2020, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

Let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties

of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Madhepura, in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 260 of 2020, subject to the

conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. as under:

(a) that such person shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter,

(b) that such person shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which is suspected,

and

(c) that such persons shall not directly or indirectly make Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10762 of 2021(2) dt.14-06-2021 and inducement, threat or

promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or

tamper with the evidence.

And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner

has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail

bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

The application stands allowed.