Tuntun Singh @ Amrendra Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36570 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2024 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== TUNTUN SINGH @ AMRENDRA KUMAR SINGH SON OF YOGENDRA PRASAD SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MAITHI, P.S. - GAIGHAT, DISTRICT - MUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 05-07-2024 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 353, 332, 333, 224 and 225 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the allegation against the petitioner is not of dealing in illegal sale of liquor, but has been implicated in the instant case with an allegation that when the police force

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36570 of 2024(2) dt.05-07-2024 2/3 had gone to the house of the named accused persons for arresting them as they had assaulted Chowkidar, when it is alleged that the petitioner along with other accused came at the place of occurrence and pelted stones on the police and freed Kamlesh Singh and Om Prakesh Kumar, who were apprehended. It is further submitted that the petitioner is neighbour of Kamlesh Singh and when the police had come to arrest him, the petitioner, being neighbour, also came out of his house to witness the occurrence, but came to be implicated. It is also submitted that no doubt, picture of the petitioner had been captured in the video recording, but then the petitioner is not seen indulging in any overt act rather was standing at the place of occurrence.

4.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

5.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36570 of 2024(2) dt.05-07-2024 3/3 is pending/successor court in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 82 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

6.

Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T