Anuj Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32888 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2018 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Anuj Singh Son Of Ramvaran Singh R/O Village- Pakari, P.S.- Fatehpur, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kr. Thakur, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 12-10-2022 Let the defect(s), 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 Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 344 of 2018 lodged under Sections 302, 120(B)/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act. As per the prosecution case, there are total 4 named accused persons alongwith 3-4 unknown accused persons are there in the F.I.R. upon whom the suspicion has been casted by the informant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. His name has figured in this case by virtue of the statement made by a witness, namely,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32888 of 2022(2) dt.12-10-2022 2/2 Bhanu Kumar @ Surajbhan Kumar about his involvement in the commission of the crime. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 30.12.2021 having 2 criminal cases pending against him in which he was acquitted. He further submits that petitioner is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon him by the Court. Upon the specific query that whether charge has been framed or not, learned counsel submits that as per his knowledge, charge has not been framed in this case.

He further submits that the bail of other co-accused has been rejected in this case with certain observations. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

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 but he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge and the Trial Court shall thereafter release him imposing conditions so that he shall not evade his appearance during trial.

With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) sadique/- U T