Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36130 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-357 Year-2020 Thana- BEUR District- Patna ====================================================== Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Rai Son of Shailendra Rai, Resident of VillageBetauna, P.S.- Beur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 20-09-2022 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 STR No. 793 of 2021 arising out of Beur P.S. Case No. 357 of 2020, lodged under section 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution, due to land dispute whose description was made in the F.I.R. itself the present dispute took place. The allegation against the present petitioner is to fire on the son of informant by which he injured.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36130 of 2022(2) dt.20-09-2022 2/3 submits that petitioner is not a criminal, rather the entire dispute is only with a view to old land dispute about which description has been made in the F.I.R. itself. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that a unique injury report has been given by the Doctor in which the type of injury is grievous and nature of injury is become penetrative. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner is in custody since 01.07.2021 having one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail. He further submits that petitioner is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon him by the Court. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
Upon specific query of the Court that whether charge has been framed or not, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge has already been framed in this case. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, let the petitioner above named, be granted bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVII, Patna in connection with STR No. 793 of 2021 arising out of Beur P.S. Case No. 357 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36130 of 2022(2) dt.20-09-2022 3/3 down under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. with other following conditions:
A. The petitioner shall support in trial and shall appear physically before the lower court on each and every date fixed, in case of non-appearance for two consecutive dates without sufficient cause, shall be resulted into cancellation of his bail bond.
B. One of the bailors shall be close relative who shall file affidavit before the court about his relationship with the petitioner.
C. The petitioner shall file an affidavit at the time of furnishing of bail bond that he shall not involve in such criminal activity during the continuance of present bail bond, violation of this condition shall be resulted into cancellation of his present bail bond.
With this observation, the bail application stands allowed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.) ritik/- U T