Sandip Thakur @ Sanjiv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57998 of 2024 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74065 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-388 Year-2023 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== Sandip Thakur @ Sanjiv Kumar S/O Ravindra Thakur R/O Village- Indpe, P.S- Jamui, Distt.- Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Ms.Sharda Kumari,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-08-2024 Heard Mr.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Sharda Kumari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The present modification application has been filed for modification of the order dated 29.02.2024.

3. By the order dated 29.02.2024, the petitioner was granted privilege of anticipatory bail with the following conditions :- I. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57998 of 2024(2) dt.09-08-2024 2/3 II. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

III. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to communication gap on the basis of the information furnished by the Pairvikar, it was stated in Para-3 of the anticipatory bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal history but in fact the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one, as mentioned in para-4 of the present modification application.

5. The Court also noticed Section 362 of Cr.P.C. it reads as follows :- "362 - Court not to alter judgment. Save as otherwise provided by this Code or by any other law for the time being in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57998 of 2024(2) dt.09-08-2024 3/3 force, no Court, when it has signed its judgment or final order disposing of a case, shall alter or review the same except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error."

6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant modification petition is dismissed.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T