Manoj Singh @ Manoj Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50579 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-639 Year-2017 Thana- SAHARSA District- Saharsa ====================================================== MANOJ SINGH @ MANOJ KUMAR SINGH Son of Late Madan Singh Resident of New Colony, Ward No. 8, P.S.- Saharsa, District- Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Viveka Nandsingh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Narsingh Tanti ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 14-08-2019 This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Saharsa P.S. Case No. 639/2017, disclosing offences under Sections 302, 120 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case is that the informant after hearing the abuse by the co-accused persons came down and saw co-accused persons Gaurav Kumar, Nirav Kumar and Boby Kumar armed with pistols trying to kill his father and after seeing the informant coming down, co-accused Monu Rajak and Pawan Rajak armed with pistol ran towards the informant, however, he anyhow managed to save his life by locking the gate. Thereafter, coaccused Gaurav Kumar and Pawan Rajak fired on the father of the informant causing his death, thereafter, police came and accused persons fled away. It is also alleged that after the occurrence this petitioner and others started torturing and pressurizing the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50579 of 2019(2) dt.14-08-2019 2/2 petitioner to withdraw the case and further there is also allegation of demand of rangdari, Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has falsely been implicated in this case and there is no allegation the petitioner of firing on the father of the informant and so far other allegations are concerned, they are general and omnibus in nature.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner is accused in two more cases and in one of the cases, he has been convicted also. Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner rather petitioner may surrender before the court below and make prayer for regular bail and if any such application is filed, the court below will dispose of the same on the merit of the case, if possible, on same day, without being prejudiced by this order.

This application is, accordingly, disposed of. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunilkumar/- U T