Niraj Sah @ Neeraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6711 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2023 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ====================================================== NIRAJ SAH @ NEERAJ KUMAR S/o Late Chandrakishor Sah Resident of Village-Hingwa Ward No.-12, P.S.-Bhargama, District-Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-02-2024 Heard Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh,learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bhargama P.S.Case No.188 of 2023,FIR dated 10.07.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341,323,324,307,447,354(B),379,504,506/34 of IPC.

3. According to prosecution case, on 08.07.2023, when the daughter of the informant was cooking food in the courtyard, in the meantime, the accused persons including the petitioner suddenly came into the courtyard of the informant and started abusing and beating the informant's daughter with slaps and sticks.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6711 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2024 2/3 petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Fruther submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific allegaiton of any assault or overt-act attributed agianst the petitioner rather there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner that the petitioner was also involved in the present occurrence and it appears from the FIR that the specific allegation of assault are attributed against co-accused persons, namely, Santsevi Sah and Aman Sah and there is case and counter case.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate1st Class, Araria in connection with Bhargama P.S.Case No.188 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6711 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2024 3/3 (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(III) 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/her 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.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T