Dilip Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37723 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2017 Thana- SARAI District- Vaishali ====================================================== Dilip Singh, aged 40 years (Male), Son of Mundrika Singh Resident of Village- Rampur Rajdhari, P.S.- Mahua, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umesh Lal Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 24-06-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sarai P.S. Case No. 143 of 2017 registered for offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 353, 427, 337, 283, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of the Essential Service Maintenance Act.

In the present case, an allegation has been made that about 300-350 persons blocked the N.H. demanding compensation for the dependent of the deceased who died in the road accident.

The petitioner has been shown to be a member of the mob having no specific allegation of any overt act. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37723 of 2019(2) dt.24-06-2019 2/2 case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, 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 learned Assistant Chief Judicial Magistrate-XIII cum Sub Judge- XIV, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Sarai P.S. Case No. 143 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also subject to condition that whenever the police will call the petitioner for investigation/interrogation, he will remain present and if he would not present himself, the privilege of grant of anticipatory bail shall be deemed to have been canceled. It is made clear that, in future, if the petitioner is found involved in similar type of offence, the prosecution will be at liberty to pray for cancellation of the bail granted today. (Shivaji Pandey, J) rishi/- U T