Kundan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24009 of 2024 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48143 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2022 Thana- MALAYPUR District- Jamui ====================================================== Kundan Kumar S/o- Jagdeo Das Village - Devachak, P.S. Malaypur, District Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-03-2024 Heard Mr.Prabhat Ranjan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Surendra Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The present modification application has been filed for modification of order dated 06.12.2022.

3. By the order dated 06.12.2022, the petitioner and Anr. were granted anticipatory bail with the following conditions :- I. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24009 of 2024(2) dt.27-03-2024 2/3 II. If the petitioners tamper 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 petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to communication gap on the basis of the information furnished by the Pairvikar, it was stated in Para-3 of the anticipatory bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal history but in fact the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one.

5. The Court also noticed Section 362 of Cr.P.C. it reads as follows :- "362 - Court not to alter judgment. Save as otherwise provided by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, no Court, when it has signed its judgment or final order

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24009 of 2024(2) dt.27-03-2024 3/3 disposing of a case, shall alter or review the same except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error."

6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant modification petition is dismissed.

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