Binit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22292 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2020 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani ====================================================== BINIT KUMAR S/O BINOD PRASAD, R/o village- Yamsam, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anand Kishore Chaudhary, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Zainul Abedin, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-10-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel or the informant through video conferencing.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under sections 307 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the ten named accused persons including the petitioner herein and 8-10 unknown persons assaulted the informant and others leading to serious injuries. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations as levelled in the FIR are false and concocted. The injury report of the injured Sushil Prasad has been brought on record as Annexure-2 to the petition, from perusal of which it would transpire that the injury which may be attributable to the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22292 of 2021(2) dt.08-10-2021 2/2 herein as per the contents of the FIR have been found to be simple in nature. The petitioner is in custody since 29.12.2020 and chargesheet has been submitted in the case.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. It is submitted by learned counsel for the informant that not only the petitioner is named in the FIR but there is direct allegation against him of having assaulted with an iron rod having caused grievous injury on Sushil Prasad. Hence the bail be rejected.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts of the case and submissions made on behalf of the petitioner together with the petitioner having remained in custody for over 9 months, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case no. 188 of 2020 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Spd/- U