Pramod Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88992 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2024 Thana- Lakho District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.
Ranjeet Singh, aged about 45 years (Male), S/o Ram Chandra Singh, R/o Village- Lodhipur- Shahpur, P.S.- Lakho, District- Begusarai 2.
Nitya Nand Singh, aged about 64 years, S/o Late Bashistha Singh, R/o Village- Lodhipur- Shahpur, P.S.- Lakho, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party :
Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Lakho P.S. Case No. 122 of 2024 dated 02.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 109(1), 324(6), 351(3) of the B.N.S. and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant is residing in his share land since 65-70 years which is situated in Mauza-Lodipur. On 02.09.2024 at about 1.00 P.M., his villagers, Ranjeet Singh (petitioner no.1), Bhola Singh, Raushan Kumar, Bambam Singh, Subodh Singh, Pramod Singh, Nityanand Singh
2/4 (petitioner no. 2), Kanhaiya Kumar alongwith 3-4 unknown persons armed with various weapons attacked the house of the informant. Ranjeet Singh (petitioner no. 1) and Bhola Singh opened fire on the family of the informant with an intention to kill them but anyhow, they saved their lives. In the meantime, the co-accused Raushan Kumar assaulted with Khanti on the head of Vikash Kumar, the brother-in-law of the informant, causing head injury. The co-accused Bambam Singh assaulted with Khanti on the head of Niraj which hit on his arm and leg. Pramod Singh assaulted with farsa on Nilesh Kumar, the brother-in-law of the informant, and the first farsa blow hit on his hand and second farsa blow hit on his stomach, due to which, he brutally injured.
The co-accused Subodh Singh assaulted with Khanti on the head of the informant which hit on his arm. The co-accused Kanhaiya Kumar and Nityanand Singh (petitioner no. 2) assaulted with iron rod on the waist of the wife of the informant. The accused persons also damaged the pillar and wall of the building causing loss of Rs. 1,00,000/- and also threatened to kill them.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that both parties are
3/4 pattidars and there is homestead land dispute between them. It is further alleged that on the alleged date of occurrence, the prosecution party was aggressor and they were trying to encroach on the land which fell in share of the petitioners. The injured persons from the prosecution side had received some simple injuries because the petitioners tried to protect their lives and property due to which the prosecution party have received some injuries. It is further submitted that as per the F.I.R., Ranjeet Singh (petitioner no. 1) and the co-accused Bhola Singh opend fire on the family of the informant but which did not hit anyone and the co-accused Kanhaiya Kumar and Nityanand Singh (petitioner no. 2) assaulted with iron rod on the waist of the wife of the informant.
The doctor has examined the injured Pratima Devi, the wife of the informant, and found 'no any external injury' on her. It is submitted that the other co-accused persons, namely, Bhola Singh, Bambam Singh, Subodh Singh and Kanhaiya Kumar have already been granted anticipatory bail by another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 89243 of 2024 under order dated 23.01.2025. The petitioner no. 1 has three criminal antecedents in which he is on bail and the petitioner no.
4/4 paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner no. 1 is in custody since 13.09.2024 and the petitioner no. 2 is in custody since 28.09.2024 in this case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioners, above named, are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Begusarai in connection with Lakho P.S. Case No. 122 of 2024 with further condition:- (I) The petitioners are directed to remain physically present before the learned court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bonds of the petitioners are liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) U.K./- U T