Nishant Singh @ Bholu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50112 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2019 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Nishant Singh @ Bholu Son of Subodh Singh, Resident of Village- Nirpur, Police Station- Samastipur (Muffasil), District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 17-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner in the present case is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Samastipur (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 104 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 341, 323, 326, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner is named in the FIR with the general and omnibus kind of allegations, in course of investigation it has come that the co-accused Pramod Singh had fired and not this petitioner.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has after going through the case diary submitted that the allegation of causing fire is upon co-accused Pramod Singh.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50112 of 2019(3) dt.17-10-2019 2/2 In the aforesaid view of the matter, since the allegation of firing is not against the petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today, let the petitioner abovenamed be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (fifteen thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Samastipur in connection with Samastipur (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 104 of 2019, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. i.e. (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/ved U T