Chandan Singh @ Chandan Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21857 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-648 Year-2019 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== CHANDAN SINGH @ CHANDAN KUMAR SINGH SON OF OM PRAKASH SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BHADEYAN, P.S.- ARRAH MUFFASIL, DISTRICT- BHOJPUR (BIHAR) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Rajesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 14-07-2021 The present petition has been taken up for consideration through the mode of Video Conferencing in view of the prevailing situation on account of COVID-19 Pandemic. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Anita Kumari Singh, the learned APP for the State. The present petition is by way of third attempt at the behest of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection Arrah Nawada PS case no. 648 of 2018 under Sections 341, 324, 307, 120(B), 34 of Indian Penal Code and 27 of Arms Act, inasmuch as the earlier bail petition filed by the petitioner for grant of regular bail was rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.02.2020, passed in Cr. Misc. no. 6353
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21857 of 2021(2) dt.14-07-2021 2/3 of 2020 and then by this Court vide order dated 29.01.2021, passed in Cr. Misc. no. 28807 of 2020.
The allegation against the petitioner is regarding him having fired on the injured person causing injury on his body. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner Sri. Yogesh Chandra Verma has submitted that the petitioner is languishing in custody since 20.08.2019 and an observation was made by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.02.2020 that the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail once the charges have been framed. Upon a query made by this Court, it has been submitted that the charges have been framed in the present case on 06.02.2021, hence the petitioner is renewing his prayer for grant of regular bail. The learned Senior Counsel has further submitted that the injured person has not died and is hail and hearty.
Per contra, the learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is grave since he is said to have fired on the injured person.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21857 of 2021(2) dt.14-07-2021 3/3 parties and taking into account the materials available on record as also considering the fact that now the charge has been framed against the petitioner in the on-going trial and the petitioner is languishing in custody since 20.08.2019, I deem it fit and proper to admit the petitioner to the privilege of bail, accordingly the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court of C.J.M., Arrah (Bhojpur) or his successor in connection with Arrah Nawada PS case no. 648 of 2019. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T