Vikki Singh @ Kriti Ranjan Kumar @ Kriti Ranjan Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.34108 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -94 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHNAR District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Vikki Singh @ Kriti Ranjan Kumar @ Kriti Ranjan Kumar Singh, son of Satyendra Singh @ Sateyndra Naryan Singh, resident of village - Shapur Panapur, P.S. Mahanar, District - Vaishali .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Sri Jitendra Kumar Sri Rajeev Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s : Sri Ajay Kumar-1 Sri Prasoon Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-07-2017 Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned counsel, assisted by Sri Rajeev Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner , learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Prasoon Sinha, learned counsel , who has appeared on behalf of the informant. The petitioner /younger brother of the husband of the deceased , has approached this court with a prayer to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail in Mahanar P.S. Case No. 94 of 2017 registered for the offence under Section 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
By way of referring to the statement made in paragraph no. '9' of the petition it was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is in Merchant Navy and most of the time he works outside the country and submits that in the present
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34108 of 2017 (2) dt.20-07-2017 2/3 case entire family members have been made accused. He further submits that husband of the deceased is already in custody. Sri Prasoon Sinha, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail . He submits that in the F.I.R. besides other accused there is specific accusation against the petitioner and as such, in a case for offence under Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner may not be extended. Besides hearing, I have perused the materials available on record. Considering the statement made in paragraph no.
'9' of the petition, which suggests that he is in Merchant Navy and the fact that husband is already in custody, which fact has not been disputed by Sri Prasoon Sinha, I am of the view that privilege of anticipatory bail can be extended to the petitioner. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, let the petitioner Vikki Singh @ Kriti Ranjan Kumar @ Kriti Ranjan Kumar Singh be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand ) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur / concerned court in connection with Mahanar P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34108 of 2017 (2) dt.20-07-2017 3/3 contemplated under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.
(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U T