Allowed

Manoj Singh @ Rajendra Ram v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Jan 2022CR. MISC./13610/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Patna, considering the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and jail congestion, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Orders were issued to remove document defects within four weeks and furnish bail bonds within twelve weeks from the date of this order.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond subject to removing defects within four weeks and furnishing bail bonds with sureties within twelve weeks.

Manoj Singh @ Rajendra Ram Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13610 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2020 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad

¶3

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

¶4

MANOJ SINGH @ RAJENDRA RAM S/o Gopal Ram R/o villageKapasiya, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Aurangabad

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 24-01-2022

¶13

Due to the third wave of COVID-19 Pandemic, the matter

¶14

is being taken up by way of Virtual Court proceeding.

¶15

The matter has been listed under the heading ‘For Orders’ under the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice.

¶16

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

¶17

Learned Counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks after restoration of normalcy.

¶18

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Aurangabad Muffasil P.S. case No.129/2020 registered under Sections 302, 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

Prosecution case, in short, is that two dead bodies were being cremated near the river by the accused persons. On seeing the police party, the accused persons fled away.

¶20

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13610 of 2021(3) dt.24-01-2022 2/3

¶22

the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. As per the allegation, two dead bodies were being cremated by the side of the river and on seeing the police accused persons fled away. In course of investigation, it has come that one Manish Kumar is said to have killed the deceased. No allegation of assault is alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner is alleged to have helped in disposing of the dead bodies.

¶23

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the complaint case/F.I.R.

¶24

It is necessary to indicate here that this Court while considering the prayer made in the present anticipatory bail application has taken note of the exponential rise in number of covid cases due to outbreak of third wave of Covid-19 pandemic. Further this Court can also not lose sight of the fact that the condition of jails is not conducive and suitable to the present situation which has arisen due to the sudden rise in covid cases.

¶25

Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13610 of 2021(3) dt.24-01-2022 3/3

¶27

before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in connection with Aurangabad Muffasil P.S. case No.129/2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶28

Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶29

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶30

Narendra/-

¶31

U T

Manoj Singh @ Rajendra Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Singh @ Rajendra Ram 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

Archana Kumari Bharti Vs the State of Bihar

Mangal Kumar @ Mangal Mahto Vs the State of Bihar through Inspector of Excise, Begusarai.

Rakesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar through Vigilance, Patna

Istak Ali Vs The State of Bihar

Indrapati Kumar @ Indrapati Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Uchit Yadav Vs The State of Bihar