Sanjay Tiwari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.135 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-224 Year-2022 Thana- SAHPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Sanjay Tiwari Son of Late Nathuni Tiwary Resident of village and P.O.- Ishwarpura, P.S.- Sahpur, District - Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Om Prakash Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 25-03-2023 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Shahpur P.S. Case No. 224 of 2022 lodged under Sections 341, 307, 504/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner along with others is to demand Rangdari from Indira Awash Colony. The allegation is demand of Rs.3,000/- and upon non-payment, the firing of 6 round took place in which 3 blank cartridges were recovered from the spot.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Under political rivalry, the present case has been filed against petitioner and others as he is supporter of Mukhiya. Counsel further submits that there is one criminal case pending against him in which he is on bail. Counsel submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.135 of 2023(2) dt.25-03-2023 2/2 petitioner is in custody since 22.10.2022.

Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the allegations made in the F.I.R. is true and supported by the Seizure List where recovery of 3 blank cartridges have been found by the police.

Upon specific query whether charge has been framed or not. As per the knowledge of counsel, charge has not been framed till date.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. The Trial Court is directed to release him on bail thereafter, imposing its own conditions that that he may not evade his appearance during trial.

With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) prakashmani/- U T