Govind Dhanuk v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32064 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-515 Year-2018 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Govind Dhanuk Son of Santosh Dhanuk Resident of Village - Dharhara, P.S.- Ara Town, District - Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravindra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 14-05-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 515 of 2018 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act. Later on, Sections 25(1-b)a/26/35 of Arms Act were added.

In the written report, it is alleged that petitioner made firing causing injury on left thigh of the informant. The injury report has been enclosed as Annexure- 3 which shows that one entry wound was present on anterior aspect of thigh size of 1/2" x 5" x 2/6" and exit wound was not present. The opinion has been kept reserved.

From the impugned order it also appears that no final

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32064 of 2019(2) dt.14-05-2019 2/2 report with regard to the injury has been received. Petitioner is in custody since 05.09.2018.

Keeping in view the period of custody already spent by this petitioner, 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur, in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 515 of 2018, subject to the condition that:- (i) Both the bailors shall be the close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner shall be present on each and every date fixed by the Court and absence on two consecutive dates without valid reason will result in cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner.

(iii) If petitioner tamper with the evidence in the case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner.

(Sanjay Priya, J) shyambihari/mu keshU T