Amarjeet Tanti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60568 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2022 Thana- LAXMIPUR District- Jamui ====================================================== Amarjeet Tanti S/O Radheshyam Tanti R/O Village-Kebil, P.S- Laxmipur, District- Jamui, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Piyush Tiwari, Advocate Mr. Aklavya Chandan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-08-2024 Heard Ld. counsel for the petitioner and Ld. APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.Tr. No. 492 of 2022 arising out of Laxmipur P.S. Case No.20 of 2022, dated 14.01.2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 393 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

3. The prosecution case as emerges from the FIR is that on 13.01.2022 at about 9:00 pm, when the informant was closing his shop, two unknown persons tried to enter his shop forcibly and when he started resisting them, they opened fire upon him, due to which he got injured.

2/4

4. Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the Petitioner is not named in the FIR. He also submits that the injury report does not support the allegation. He further submits that the similarly situated co-accused person Raj Kumar Tanti has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.04.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 8053 of 2023.

5. He further submits that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 10.05.2022.

6. It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has earlier been made accused in seven other cases.

7. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one.

8. However, Ld. APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail. 9.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is allowed, directing the petitioner, above-named, to be enlarged on bail on his

3/4 furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Ld. Additional Sessions Judge-II, Jamui, in connection with S.Tr. No. 492 of 2022 arising out of Laxmipur P.S. Case No.20 of 2022 on the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner will make himself available for interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required. (ii) The petitioner will undertake that investigation/trial will not get hampered on account of his absence or non-cooperation. He must be available to the police or the court whenever his presence is required. (iii) The petitioner 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.

(iv) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioner has criminal antecedents other than the disclosed one, Ld. court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting

4/4 satisfied that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same. (v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, Ld. court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Jitendra Kumar, J.) Ravishankar/ ChandanU T