Rajeev Ranjan @ Rajeev Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19841 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-548 Year-2021 Thana- GHOSI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== RAJEEV RANJAN @ RAJEEV RANJAN KUMAR SON OF ARUN PRASAD @ ARUN KUMAR R/O VILLAGE- DAHARPUR, P.S.- GHOSHI, DISTRICT- JEHANABAD ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amrendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-10-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338, 379, 353, 307, 427 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant who is a police officer alleges that on 24.12.2021 while he was patrolling with his team, he got secret information about illegal sand mining on account of which he reached at the place of occurrence when the tractor driver who had loaded illegal sand on seeing the police force tried to flee by crushing police team with tractor, it is next alleged that in the occurrence a Constable was also injured and the chowkidar recognized the driver as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19841 of 2022(2) dt.18-10-2022 2/2 Bholu and this petitioner was sitting with him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that he came to be implicated at the instance of chowkidar because of his antecedent, it is also submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true, without admitting, then it was Bholu Kumar who was driving the tractor, it is next submitted that no injury report of any of the injured is on record. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Ghoshi P.S. Case No. 548 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T