Daya Nand Panjiyara v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34241 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2015 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka ====================================================== DAYA NAND PANJIYARA S/O SHIV NANDAN PANJIYARA R/o Nagardih, P.S.- Amarpur (Fullidumar), District- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Braj Nandan Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 03-01-2022 Heard Mr. Braj Nandan Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Amarpur (Phulidumar) P.S. Case No. 99 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 447, 324, 307, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he fired upon the informant causing him gun shot injury near his neck. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail inasmuch as the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.10.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. 15818 of 2020. The petitioner is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34241 of 2021(2) dt.03-01-2022 2/3 in custody since 8.7.2019.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the parties are agnates and there is previous land dispute between them. Learned counsel further submits that the cases which are mentioned in paragraph-3 of the bail application as criminal antecedent of the petitioner, were lodged by the side of the prosecution against him due to previous land dispute. Learned counsel next submits that the charge sheet has already been submitted and there is no likelihood that the petitioner will abscond or tamper with the evidence.

Regards being had to the submission made by the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record, the fact that both the parties are agnates, there is a land dispute between them, the petitioner is in custody since 8.7.2019, charge sheet has already been submitted and this is second attempt for grant of bail on behalf of the petitioner, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, let the petitioner, above named, be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Shri Vikas Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Banka, in connection with Amarpur

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34241 of 2021(2) dt.03-01-2022 3/3 (Phulidumar) P.S. Case No. 99 of 2015.

It is made clear that at the time of furnishing bail bonds all the parties shall follow the guidelines regarding social distancing.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) S.Ali/- U T