Ranjay Singh @ Ranjan Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33905 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2010 Thana- CHHATAUNI District- East Champaran ====================================================== RANJAY SINGH @ RANJAN SINGH Son of Late Firangi Singh Resident of village - Patkhauli, P.S.- Patkhauli, District - West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 28-06-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case No.92 of 2010 instituted under Sections 302,120(B) of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act lodged on 22.09.2010 by the informant Sumit Kumar Verma. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 22.09.2010 a written report was submitted alleging against accuseds (1) Kameshwar Prasad, (2) Ashutosh Kumar @ Guddu, (3) Arbind Kumar @ Pappu and two unknown persons that as he was going to his residence with his father, Shiv Kumar Verma for purchasing vegetables from Kachahari Chowk, Motihari on 22.09.2010 at 08:15 p.m. and as they came near the house of Sitaram Paswan at Chhota Bariyarpur and went to ease near the road side, Kameshwar Prasad exhorted Ashutosh Kumar
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33905 of 2023(2) dt.28-06-2023 2/3 @Guddu to kill to the father of the informant whereafter Ashutosh Kumar @ Guddu fired indiscriminately upon the father of the informant along with two other persons, who too had came on motorcycle. They later escaped. His father died on the spot. Accordingly, the FIR.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his name has been dragged in the case and the police has taken extra judicial confession and further that he was granted the privilege of anticipatory bail in Cr. Misc. No.16662 of 2011 (Annexure-1 of the petition) but could not furnish thebail bond as he was remanded in a different case. He further submits that is in custody since 28.07.2021 (as stated in para-11 of the petition).
Learned APP opposes the prayer but concede that earlier he was granted anticipatory bail.
Considering the aforesaid facts as also the period of custody and ultimately will have to face the trial, this Court is inclined to extend him privilege of bail.
Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case No.92 of 2010 to the satisfaction of learned Additional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33905 of 2023(2) dt.28-06-2023 3/3 District & Sessions Judge,22, Motihari, East Champaran, subject to following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every month for next one year to mark attendance; (iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Prakash Narayan /- U T