Dhanjee Pandey @ Dhananjay Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68525 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2017 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== DHANJEE PANDEY @ DHANANJAY PANDEY SON OF RAM NARAYAN PANDEY Resident of Village - Karup, P.S.- Kargahar, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jitendra Narain Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Zainul Abedin, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks after complete start of the physical Court. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 22.01.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted and has antecedent of nine cases.

The informant alleges that Bablu Pandey, Disu Pandey, Rajesh Sah fired one shot each on the father of the informant Jhunnilal Choudhary causing injury as a result of which he died.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68525 of 2021(2) dt.10-05-2022 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that there is specific allegation of firing against three accused persons of causing three bullet injuries to the father of the informant which also gets corroborated from the injury report. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name transpired during the course of investigation based on the confessional statement of Chandan Kumar Pandey which has no evidentiary value.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 22.01.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted and is not named in the FIR and name of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of co-accused, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No. 168 of 2017, subject to the condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner shall be the father Ram Narayan Pandey and further if the learned court below comes to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68525 of 2021(2) dt.10-05-2022 3/3 a conclusion that the petitioner after his release is trying to delay the trial of the case in any manner then the learned court below shall forthwith cancel the bail bond of the petitioner after recording reasons.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T