Vipul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.22553 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -165 Year- 2012 Thana -EKMA District- SARAN ====================================================== Vipul Kumar, S/o Harendra Ray, R/o Vill.- Manikpur, P.S.- Ekma, DistrictSaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Lal, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 14-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Sessions Trial No. 284 of 2015 arising out of Ekma P.S. Case No. 165 of 2012 instituted for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is specific allegation in the Fard-e-beyan of making firing on the son of the informant against co-accused Rakesh Singh. Subsequently, the son of the informant died. Petitioner has been summoned to face trial under Section 319 Cr. P.C. The other co-accused Chandan Kumar with similar allegation has been granted anticipatory bail By this Court vide order dated 08.03.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. 12664 of 2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22553 of 2018 (3) dt.14-05-2018 2/2 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioner, named above, within six weeks from today, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 284 of 2015 arising out of Ekma P.S. Case No. 165 of 2012, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be liable to cancel his bail bond and (3) if petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T