Ranjit Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29770 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-677 Year-2021 Thana- BEGUSARAI TOWN District- Begusarai ====================================================== Ranjit Singh Son Of Late Ramji Singh R/O Village- Baghi, P.S.- Town (Lohiyanagar), District- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Nandan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act. According to prosecution case, on 04.11.2021 the informant's sons namely Pankaj Kumar had a fight with F.I.R. named accused persons. It is further alleged that one of the Coaccused in anger told the informant that he will shoot his son and in the same night the informant's son got a phone call and after which he was left leaving the house and on questioning him he told that compromise is going to take place with whom he had fought in the morning. It is further alleged that on next

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29770 of 2022(3) dt.27-09-2022 2/3 day around 06:00 AM the informant got the news from the villagers that he had been shot dead along with Santosh Kumar Mahto by the persons whom he had fought.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case only on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that in fact the informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and only on the basis of hearsay statement of the villagers the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present F.I.R. He further submits that during investigation the statement of the co-accused person namely Ankit Kumar @ Ankit Chauhan was recorded but it is not clear from the statement of co-accused that who fired upon the deceased and the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 08.11.2021.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29770 of 2022(3) dt.27-09-2022 3/3 below where the case is pending in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 677 of 2021, 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 witnesses, 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 antecedent, the court below shall take step for 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) mdrashid/- U T