Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3974 of 2017 (2) dt.03-03-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3974 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -136 Year- 2016 Thana -AMAUR District- PURNIA ====================================================== Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Kumar Sah, S/o Sri Ram Chandra Sah, Resident of Village+P.O+P.S. Amour, District- Purnia..... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 03-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Amour P.S. Case No. 136 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 354, 307, 379, 427/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the petitioner told the son of the informant to break all the glasses and to injure the children and then, started assaulting the son of the informant, torn his clothes and started twisting iron rod and when the informant ran to save her son, the petitioner assaulted her also brutally and abused her and further in the occurrence Ramchandra Sah and his wife also assisted the petitioner and petitioner snatched gold chain and nose pin and in presence of the witnesses he abused in filthy languages Submission is of false implication and that the informant

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3974 of 2017 (2) dt.03-03-2017 and her son both have received simple injuries caused by hard blunt substance, no offence under Section 307 IPC is made out and allegation under Section 379 IPC is supper addition and ornamental, the petitioner is in custody since 01.12.2016 and he by remaining in custody has sufficiently been penalized. Chargesheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that there is no chance of tampering with prosecution evidence, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M. VI, Purnea in connection with Amour P.S. Case No. 136 of 2016, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T