Patna High CourtCR. MISC./75792/2023bail granted

Nitish Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2023-12-14Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75792 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2020 Thana- PIPRA District- Supaul ====================================================== NITISH RAM SON OF SANTOSH RAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGETULAPATTI, WARD NO. 10, P.S. PIPRA, DIST- SUPAUL ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs.Nafisuzzoha, Adv.

Mrs. Rabia Gulnaz, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Lalan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Pipra P.S. Case No. 112 of 2020 dated 02.05.2020 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 341, 447, 504, 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/ss 25(1-B)A, 26, 27, 35 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, 5-6 miscreants are alleged to have abused the informant on the point of pistol. After hearing alarm of the informant, one Subhash Kumar along with 20-25 villagers reached the place of occurrence and tried to snatch the pistol. Thereafter, all the miscreants succeeded to flee away from the spot.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75792 of 2023(2) dt.14-12-2023 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to land dispute. The name of the petitioner was disclosed by local villagers. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery hence, no case is made out against the petitioner. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Supaul in connection with Pipra P.S. Case No. 112 of 2020, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T