Samanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47896 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2021 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Samanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Singh Son of Late Mahadev Singh @ Shyam Narayan Singh Resident of Village- Pakadi Narotam, P.S.- Panapur, DistrictSaran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, Advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Md. Anis Akhtar, Advocate Mr. Ranjay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks of start of normal functioning of the physical court.

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 110 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act. According to prosecution case, due to land dispute with petitioner's family members this case has been instituted on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47896 of 2021(2) dt.16-12-2021 2/3 the basis of written application of informant Dashrath Singh. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that as per F.I.R. no specific allegation of the overt act against the petitioner. He further submits that the land dispute is going on between the parties and it appears from the injury report that the injury is simple and some are grievous in nature but in the F.I.R. no specific allegation against the petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 06.07.2021.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer of bail submitting that petitioner carries one criminal antecedent.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as period of custody, 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 Additional Chief Judicial MagistrateI, Saran at Chapra in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 110 of 2021, subject to the following conditions:-

1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47896 of 2021(2) dt.16-12-2021 3/3 fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) mdrashid/- U T