Amrendra Singh @ Pintu Singh @ Pintu And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24585 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -22 Year- 2016 Thana -AMBA District- AURANGABAD =====================================

1. Amrendra Singh @ Pintu Singh @ Pintu, S/o Birja Singh

2. Jogendra Singh @ Yogendar Singh, S/o Late Sheonandan Singh

3. Raushan Kumar Singh, S/o Jogendra Singh @ Yogendar Singh

4. Dipak Kumar @ Shani, S/o Jogendra Singhh @ Yogendar Singh All R/o Village-Balia, P.S.-Amba, District-Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Adv. For the State :Mr. Amitesh Kumar (APP) For the Informant :Mr. Nawal Kishor Singh, Adv. ===================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-06-2016 Heard the parties.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Amba P.S. Case No.22 of 2016, disclosing offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 354, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24585 of 2016 (3) dt.20-06-2016 2/3 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has submitted that the allegations, contained in the First Information Report, appear to be not believable inasmuch as there is allegation that petitioner No.4 assaulted the injured Baban Singh with sword. However, the injury inflicted upon said Baban Singh has been found to have been caused by hard and blunt substance. He has also submitted that so far as petitioner No.1 is concerned, there is no specific allegation of assault against him.

So far as petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, from the bail application I find that they have criminal antecedents. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant them the privilege of anticipatory bail.

This application, to the extent it relates to petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, stands rejected with a direction to them to surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised. If they do so, their application for regular bail shall be considered by the learned court below on its own merit without being prejudiced by rejection of present application for grant of anticipatory bail.

So far as petitioner Nos.1 and 4 are concerned,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24585 of 2016 (3) dt.20-06-2016 3/3 this application is allowed. Let the petitioner Nos.1 and 4, abovenamed, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, in connection with Amba P.S. Case No.22 of 2016, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

This is subject to the condition that the petitioner Nos.1 and 4 shall present themselves before the police/Court, as the case may be, as and when required and in the event of failure on their part to appear before the Court on two consecutive occasions, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Praveen-II/- U T