Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35194 of 2012 (4) dt.03-12-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.35194 of 2012 ========================================== Pramod Barnwal @ Chacha, son of Ayodhya Barnwal, resident of village- Beharwatari, P.S. Charkha Pathar, District – Jamui. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ========================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ORAL ORDER 5 05-12-2012 The learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State were heard at length earlier. This is an application under Section 439 & 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking bail by the petitioner in connection with Jhajha Rail P.S. Case No. 02/2010 pending before Railway Judicial Magistrate, Kiul, Lakhisarai, for offences under [STATUTE] and under Section 3/4 of Explosive Substances Act and under Section 17 of C.L.A. Act. In this case instituted against unknown. Petitioner’s name appears emerging during investigation on extra judicial confession of co-apprehended accused but finding the petitioner in custody at Jamui, in connection with other cases against him under the jurisdiction of Sessions Division, Jamui. On the request made by Investigating Officer production warrant was Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35194 of 2012 (4) dt.03-12-2012 issued, but before the petitioner, could be produced and remanded there before the court at Lakhisarai, in Session Division, Munger, on his behalf prayer for bail was made which was refused by the learned Court concerned and thereafter by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lakhisarai, in B.P. No. 478(C) of 2012 vide order dated 18.8.2012, only on the ground of its maintainability since at no point of time petitioner was produced and remanded in the instant case, which is admittedly yet to be done. It is vehemently submitted that the petitioner is detained there at Jamui since production warrant was issued only at the instance of prosecution, against him and almost under similarly situated circumstance in another matter a Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 35320/2011 (Ravi Kumar Vs. State of Bihar) vide order dated 10.02.2012, allowed the prayer to release the petitioner therein on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner further placed reliance upon the decision reported in a case Baleshwar Paswan Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors in Cr. W.J.C. No. 586/1993 reported in 1995(2) PLJR 164. During further hearing by filing supplementary affidavit, it is placed that at Jamui, there Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35194 of 2012 (4) dt.03-12-2012 are two cases pending against the petitioner bearing Sono P.S. Case No. 20/2010 under [STATUTE] wherein he has been ordered to be released on bail vide order dated 25.06.2012 in Cr. Misc. No. 22647/2012, and another case bearing Sikandra P.S. Case No. 35/2010 registered for offences under [STATUTE] and 27 of the Arms Act, wherein recently vide order dated 8.11.2012, petitioner has been ordered to be released on bail vide order passed in Cr. Misc. No. 25269/2012, and now in no case at Jamui he is in custody. However, it is nowhere mentioned in the supplementary affidavit whether in pursuance of the orders referred to above, whether bail bonds have been furnished on behalf of the petitioner and accepted by the courts concerned or not, but one thing is crystal clear that at least till 8.11.2012, petitioner was in custody in connection with the cases at Jamui and it is also undisputed position that till date petitioner has not been produced at Lakhisarai, in pursuance of production warrant issued earlier and any order of remand is passed against him in the instant case bearing Jhajha Rail P.S. Case No. 02/2010. And here it is to be examined whether Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35194 of 2012 (4) dt.03-12-2012 the petitioner is entitled to move for regular bail or not ? In the case before Division Bench of this Court (Baleshwar Paswan Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.) the matter for consideration before the Hon’ble Court was quite different and the accused therein was in police custody on being apprehended, but since sustained several injuries, he was under treatment for a substantial long period with due intimation to the court in seisin. Though, at no point of time, he was placed before the court concerned and there was no order of formal remand, but at least the accused therein was in police custody and taking into consideration the provisions as contemplated under section 57 and 167 of Code of Criminal Procedure, there was no interference in the order granting the accused bail, since he was ordered to be released during pendency of the writ application. But, as it also appears that the accused therein was in custody only in connection with the said case. The Hon’ble Court in paragraph 12 and 13 of the judgment have clearly stated that:- “12. To appreciate the point canvassed at the bar it will be useful to quote the provision of Section 439, which runs as follows:- 439. Special powers of High Court or Court of Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35194 of 2012 (4) dt.03-12-2012 Sessions regarding bail:- (1) A High Court or Court of Sessions may direct - (a) that any person accused of an offence and in custody be released on bail and if the offence is of the nature specified in sub- section (3) of Sec. 437, may impose any condition which it considers necessary for the purposes mentioned in that sub-section; (b) that any condition imposed by a Magistrate when releasing any person on bail be set aside or modified : Provided that the High Court or the Court of Sessions shall, before granting bail to a person, who is accused of an offence which is triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions or which, though not so triable, is punishable with imprisonment for life, give notice of the

Applicable IPC Section: 307

Statute Text:
Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Attempt to murder. Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by Life Convicts: When any person offending under this section is under sentence of imprisonment for life, he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.