Bablu Pandey @ Ramshankar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.63322 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -97 Year- 2017 Thana -BHAPATIYAHI District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Bablu Pandey @ Ramshankar Pandey, Son of Chandranand Pandey, Resident of Village- Murli, P.S.- Kishanpur, District- Supaul. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Vinod Shankar Modi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bhaptiahi P.S. Case No.97 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

It has been submitted that three persons on motorcycle shot fire causing injury to the pillion rider. The informant was driving the motorcycle. It has been submitted that one of the coaccused Ashish Kumar has been allowed bail by the court below on the basis of compromise. The other co-accused Vivek Kumar has been allowed bail considering his juvenility. The allegation of firing is omnibus against three persons. The petitioner is in custody since 11.10.2017 having clean antecedent.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63322 of 2017 (2) dt.12-01-2018 The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the submission.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer of bail is allowed. The petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul/Incharge Successor Court in connection with Bhaptiahi P.S. Case No.97 of 2017, G.R. No.1894 of 2017, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court.

(ii) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) If the petitioner is found involved in future in similar type of allegation, the prosecution will have liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) The petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court and on the event of failure on his part to appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail. (Sanjay Kumar, J) U Harish/-