Sunil Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15294 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2020 Thana- Industrial District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Sunil Mandal S/o Late Unchas Mandal R/o village- Mirachak, P.S.- Industrial Area, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 11-08-2022 Let the defect, if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Industrial Area P.S. Case No. 83 of 2020 lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 307, 323, 504, 506 of the I.P.C. along with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per the prosecution case, the allegation of firing upon the informant is against two persons, Mithun Kumar and the petitioner. In result, the present case has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further submits that though there is allegation of firing upon the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15294 of 2022(3) dt.11-08-2022 2/2 petitioner but allegation of firing is also upon the other accused Mithun Kumar. He further submits that the injury report indicates that it is only one injury was on the person of the informant and the said injury is simple in nature. Learned counsel for the petitioner is in custody since 29.01.2021 and charge sheet has already been submitted in this case. On the point of his criminal antecedent, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever it may be imposed upon the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. Upon going through the case diary, he submits that in the investigation material have been found against him but the injury report of the informant is showing that the injury is simple in nature.

In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at present, however, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail only after framing of charge. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Sadique/- Item No. 11 U T