Allowed

Dhiraj Panday @ Amarkant Panday v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Sept 2020CR. MISC./24231/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court allowed bail petition filed by two accused persons in a police case involving sections of IPC and Arms Act, directing them to furnish bond and abide by specific conditions regarding trial cooperation and absence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on bail by furnishing bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties of like amount to SDJM, Rohtas, subject to conditions of trial cooperation and presence.

Dhiraj Panday @ Amarkant Panday Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24231 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2020 Thana- SHIVSAGAR District- Rohtas

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Dhiraj Panday @ Amarkant Panday Son of Krishna Kant Panday Resident of Village - Konar, P.S.- Shivsagar, District – Rohtas.

¶5

Ishwar Panday @ Bishwanand Panday Son of Sudama Panday Resident of Village - Konar, P.S.- Shivsagar, District - Rohtas.

¶6

The State of Bihar ================	===	... ... Petitioners Versus ... Opposite Party ===================================
Appearance : For the Petitioners	:	Mr.N. K Agrawal, Senior Advocate and Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party ================	: ===	S. Saama, Addl Public Prosecutor ===================================
CORAM: HONOUR	ABL	E MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶7

2 22-09-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl Public Prosecutor appearing for the state through Video Conferencing.

¶8

Petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 153A, 295 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶9

Prosecution’s case is that the petitioner and two other co-accused persons caused fire arm injuries on the neck of Saif Ali and leg of the informant and two other persons.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

¶11

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24231 of 2020(2) dt.22-09-2020 2/3

¶12

petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The dispute arose on a trivial issue. There is a case and counter case in which both sides sustained injuries. Petitioner no.1 has lodged Shivsagar Police Station Case No. 111 of 2020 under sections 147,148,149,323,324,153A,295/307 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners. It is also the case of the petitioners that the victims Rafique Alam, Jiyaul Haque and Saif Ali suffered simple injuries (Annexure 2 series) on nonvital parts of the body, though opinion was kept reserved. On the other hand, accused persons, namely, Sudama Pandey, Govind Pandey and Ishwar Pandey (petitioner no.3) also suffered injuries (Annexure 3 series) simple in nature. Petitioners have got no criminal antecedent and they are in custody since 25.4.2020.

¶13

In the facts of the case, prayer for bail of the petitioners is allowed. Let the petitioners, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in Shivsagar Police Station Case No. 110 of 2020, on the following conditions:-

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24231 of 2020(2) dt.22-09-2020 3/3

¶15

(1) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶16

(2) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶17

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶18

Shashi

¶19

U T

Dhiraj Panday @ Amarkant Panday v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhiraj Panday @ Amarkant Panday v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravindra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Roy @ Rajesh Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Abul Hassan Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Hasim Laheri Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar