Patna High CourtCR. MISC./13773/2025bail granted

Ranjan Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2025-02-28Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13773 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2024 Thana- HATHUA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Ranjan Singh Son of Ajay Singh Resident of Village - Sohagpur, P.S. - Hathua, District - Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Madhav Raj, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-02-2025 Heard Mr. Madhav Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the Informnt and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 26.11.2024, in connection with Hathua P.S. Case No. 220 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 10.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 127(2), 352, 109(1), 351(2) and 303(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that all the accused persons including the petitioner assaulted by Dab on the head of the informant with intention to kill consequently head

2/4 injury occurred and bleeding begun. It is further alleged that accused petitioner snatched Rs. 30,000/- from the pocket of the informant under apprehension of killing by showing country made pistol.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he only threatened the informant and co-accused Deepak Singh who assaulted with Dab to the informant has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 414 of 2025. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 26.11.2024.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as well as learned counsel for the Informant, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries ten more cases other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the

3/4 bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in all the pending matters.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts that the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of disclosure made by co-accused person, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj in connection with Hathua P.S. Case No. 220 of 2024, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for

4/4 cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U