Patna High CourtCR. MISC./42090/2024bail granted

Tuntun Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2024-06-24Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42090 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-739 Year-2023 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Tuntun Ram S/o Late Mangal Ram @ Mangal Ram R/o Village- Kothiya, (Kothia) ward no.10, Dhobauli, (Dhabauli) P.S. Muffasil, (Lakho O.P.), District-Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sandip Kumar Gautam For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-06-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 739 of 2023 dated 22.12.2023 registered for the offences punishable u/s 307 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 20.12.2023 at about 10:30 P.M. the son of the informant was sitting at his house, in the meantime, one Nitish Kumar and Gautam Ram came and fired on the son of the informant from the back side. Further it is alleged that the petitioner Tuntan Ram who is father of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42090 of 2024(2) dt.24-06-2024 2/3 Nitish Kumar and Gautam Ram provided country made pistol and cartridge to them for killing.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. From the bare perusal of the F.I.R it is evident that the informant has stated that co-accused, namely, Nitish Kumar fired on the back side to the son of the informant so it is crystal clear there is no allegation of firing against the petitioner namely, Tuntan Ram. There is no specific allegation made against the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 28.04.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner and the period of custody, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Begusarai, in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 739 of 2023.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42090 of 2024(2) dt.24-06-2024 3/3

7. The application stands allowed.

Jyoti/- (Chandra Prakash Singh, J) U T