CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Md. Mokhtar Ahmad And Others vs State Of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 5 June 2020 · Citation: (2020) 06 PAT CK 0036

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 147, 148, 149, 186, 307, 323, 332, 333, 337, 338, 353, 386, 427, 504, 506 · Explosive Substances Act, 1908. — Section 3, 4 · Prevention Of Damage To Public Property Act, 1984 — Section 3, 4 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 27 · Information Technology Act, 2008 — Section 67
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14176 Of 202
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 382 words

Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J

1.

The matter has been heard via video conferencing due to lockdown imposed on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.

2.

Heard Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Dr. Indiwar Kumari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

3.

The petitioners are in custody in connection with Aurangabad Town PS Case No. 487 of 2019 dated 21.12.2019 instituted under Sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 34/ 323/ 332/ 333/ 337/ 338/ 353/ 186/ 307/ 504/ 506/ 427/ 386 of the Indian Penal Code; 3/4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908; 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984; 27 of the Arms Act and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2008.

4.

The allegation is that they were member of a mob of about 200 named persons, including the petitioners and many others, who in a political rally, had thrown brick-bats at the police.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in a political rally and in a peaceful protest there was skirmish between two groups and only on suspicion the petitioners have been made accused. It was submitted that the petitioners have no other criminal antecedent and are in custody since 22.12.2019 and many similarly situated co-accused have been granted bail.

6.

Learned APP submitted that the petitioners had also taken part in brick-batting. However, she did not controvert that there was no specific allegation with regard to any of the petitioners and the same was general and omnibus.

7.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioners 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, Aurangabad in Aurangabad Town PS Case No. 487 of 2019, subject to the conditions (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners and (ii) that the petitioners and the bailors shall execute bond with regard to good behaviour of the petitioners. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds shall lead to cancellation of their bail bonds.

8.

The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.