Ranjeet Chaudhary @ Ranjit Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88817 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-266 Year-2023 Thana- CHANDI District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Ranjeet Chaudhary @ Ranjit Chaudhary Son of Late Ramadhar Choudhary Resident of vill -Belaur PS- Udwantnagar Distt -Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agarwal, Sr. Advocate Ms. Kanchan Kumari, Advocate Mr. Gopesh Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chandi P.S. Case No. 266 of 2023 instituted for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 307/506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Earlier vide order dated 06-09-2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50450 of 2024, anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected.

3.

Prosecution case in short is that petitioner along with other co-accused persons, armed with various weapons, reached at the place of occurrence, threatened the informant and started firing, due to which the informant sustained fire arm

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88817 of 2024(3) dt.10-01-2025 2/3 injuries on his left shoulder, right wrist and in his stomach. 4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 25-09-2024. Petitioner bears seven criminal antecedents, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application, out of which he acquitted in four cases.

5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submits that there is no specific allegation attributed towards the petitioner, rather allegation is general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence on the alleged date and from bank statement and ATM withdrawal of the petitioner, it would reveal that petitioner was present at Dehradun on the alleged date of occurrence. Other co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 21-03-2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3829 of 2024.

6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that allegation against the petitioner is serious in nature, hence, he does not deserve the privilege of bail. 7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88817 of 2024(3) dt.10-01-2025 3/3 of the case, period of custody of the petitioner and there being no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 8.

Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Chandi P.S. Case No. 266 of 2023, subject to the following conditions: (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T