Laddu Singh @ Luttu Singh @ Bhuttu Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51210 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2012 Thana- MATIHANI District- Begusarai ====================================================== LADDU SINGH @ LUTTU SINGH @ BHUTTU SINGH S/o BACHCHA SINGH R/o VILLAGE - RAMDIRI LABHARCHAK, P.S - MATIHANI, DISTRICT - BEGUSARAI.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Braj Bhushan Poddar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual court proceedings. Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks after complete start of the physical Court. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S.T. No. 219B of 2020 arising out of Matihani P.S. Case No. 96 of 2012 instituted for the offences under Sections 302, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 27.07.2021, is a person with clean antecedent, charge-sheet has been submitted and charges have been framed.
The informant alleges that her brother-in-law Guddu Singh @ Manoj Singh was drinking in the house of Hare Ram Singh along with the petitioner, further they after drinking started
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51210 of 2021(2) dt.03-02-2022 2/3 abusing and went to the house of Laddu Singh on which the husband of the informant on coming to know called his brother and asked him to desist from abusing, thereafter at 09:00 P.M. all the three accused came to the house of the informant and Guddu Singh @ Manoj Singh brother-in-law of the informant started abusing the husband of the informant (his brother) while Hare Ram Singh and Laddu Singh were hiding, further Guddu Singh was asked by his mother and younger brother to desist from abusing his elder brother then he started having quarrel with his elder brother (deceased) accordingly the informant came to separate them on which Guddu Singh @ Manoj Singh fired killing the husband of the informant. The informant thus alleges that reason for the occurrence is that her husband had complained to the Sarpanch about Shashi Singh who for the last fifty years had captured about 60 Bighas of land in Mauza Hajaria for which the Sarpanch had issued notice to Shashi Singh.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not the assailant and only allegation against him in the FIR is that he along with Hare Ram Singh were hiding in the house of informant when they came in night along with Guddu Singh to the house of the informant.
Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that the case is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51210 of 2021(2) dt.03-02-2022 3/3 of the year 2012 and the petitioner has absconded for merely nine years and in the event the bail is granted the petitioner will again abscond.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly petitioner is not the assailant and it was not within his knowledge that he was implicated in the present case and he is willing to abide by any condition imposed by the Court in the event bail is granted.
Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody, is a person with clean antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted and is not alleged to be the assailant, let the petitioner above named be released 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 Sessions Judge-XI, Begusarai in connection with S.T. No. 219B of 2020 arising out of Matihani P.S. Case No. 96 of 2012, subject to the condition that in the event if the petitioner on two consecutive dates does not appear in the trial, the learned court below will forthwith cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T