Pintu Singh @ Pintu Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48480 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2024 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.
Pintu Singh @ Pintu Kumar Singh Son Of Jai Kumar Singh @ Ajay Kumar Singh Village- Maithi, P.S.- Gaighat, Distt.- Muzaffarpur 2.
Shabnam Kumar Singh @ Ranjan Kumar Son Of Jai Kumar Singh @ Ajay Kumar Singh Village- Maithi, P.S.- Gaighat, Distt.- Muzaffarpur 3.
Prince Kumar Singh @ Ayushman Singh Son Of Pappu Singh VillageMaithi, P.S.- Gaighat, Distt.- Muzaffarpur 4.
Bhikhari Singh @ Santosh Kumar Singh Son Of Late Maheshwar Singh Village- Maithi, P.S.- Gaighat, Distt.- Muzaffarpur 5.
Kamlesh Singh @ Kamlesh Kumar Singh Son Of Ganesh Singh VillageMaithi, P.S.- Gaighat, Distt.- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Chandra Shekhar Anand For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Bharat Lal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-08-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their 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. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48480 of 2024(2) dt.09-08-2024 2/3 further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that the allegation against the petitioners is not of dealing illegal sale of liquor, but they have been implicated in the instant case with an allegation that when the police force had gone to the house of the named accused persons for arresting them as they had assaulted the Chaukidar, when it is alleged that petitioners along with other accused persons came at the place of occurrence and pelted stones on the police force and freed Kamlesh Singh and Om Prakash Kumar, who were apprehended by the police.
It is further submitted that petitioners are neighbours of Kamlesh Singh and when the police came to arrest him, the petitioners, being neighbours, also came out of their house to witness the occurrence, but they came to be implicated. It is further submitted that no doubt, picture of the petitioners have been captured in the video recording, but petitioners were not indulging in any overt act rather was standing at the place of occurrence.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48480 of 2024(2) dt.09-08-2024 3/3 within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No.2, Muzaffarpur, East in connection with Gaighat P. S. Case No.82 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
6. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T