Sanjay Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18322 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-299 Year-2018 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Sanjay Singh, male, aged about 43 years, Son of Khantar Singh, Resident of Village- Khoparia, P.S.- Chousa, District- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Alok Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 26-08-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual court proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within three weeks of resumption of normal court proceeding. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 387, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The allegation against the petitioner is that he demanded extortion from the informant and made firing on him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18322 of 2021(2) dt.26-08-2021 2/2 petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. The allegations are false and fabricated. The petitioner is in custody since 29.06.2020 and he has got 14 criminal antecedent under different sections of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is sole accused in this case and there is allegation against him of demanding extortion and firing.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that petitioner has got 14 criminal antecedents under different sections of the Indian Penal Code, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected in connection with Chousa P.S. Case No.299 of 2018.
This application is dismissed.
However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) S.KUMAR/- U T