Vivek Kumar Ranjan @ Vivek Kumar Rajan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72068 of 2024 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38582 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2023 Thana- TILAUTHU District- Rohtas ====================================================== Vivek Kumar Ranjan @ Vivek Kumar Rajan S/o Vijay Kumar Singh R/oVillage- Tilauthu , PS- Tilauthu , Distt.- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Department of Mines and Minerals, Govt Of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Sangeeta Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 04-10-2024 The present petition has been filed for modification of order dated 26.06.2024 passed by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 38582 of 2024.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner Vivek Kumar Ranjan along with Vineet Kumar Ranjan was being heard, the submission was made that the petitioners have transferred their ownership of their brick kiln in favour of one Guddu Kumar and his partner Lallan Kumar Singh. Learned counsel further submits that, however, only petitioner no. 1 Vineet Kumar Ranjan has transferred his business and petitioner no. 2 Vivek Kumar Ranjan has not transferred his business of brick kiln. It has also been specifically submitted that due to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72068 of 2024(2) dt.04-10-2024 2/2 mistake in paragraph no. 11 the fact of transfer of business of only petitioner no. 2 has been mentioned. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner no. 2 of Cr. Misc. No. 38582 of 2024 is ready to deposit the royalty amount and hence, the order dated 26.06.2024 should be modified and learned trial court be directed to accept the bail bond of petitioner no. 2 Vivek Kumar Ranjan.

3. Perused the records.

4. From perusal of record I find that there has been specific submission on behalf of the petitioners about transfer of their brick kiln business and this Court taking note of this fact has put condition at the end of the order regarding verification of transfer of brick kiln business by the petitioners and production of document in this regard about declaration being made and royalty being paid. It seems in order to procure anticipatory bail, wrong submission has been made before this court and for this reason, I do not find any merit in the present petition and hence, the same is dismissed.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- U T