Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36690 of 2012 (2) dt.19-09-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.36690 of 2012 ====================================================== Dilip Kumar S/o Dinkar Yadav .... .... Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 2. 19.09.2012 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner is in custody since 16.05.2012 in connection with alleged offences under [STATUTE] . registered in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case No. 58 of 2012. 3. The allegation relates to FIR-named accused having fired at the police party near the railway line at Rally Bahiyar, where work of N.T.P.C. was in progress. 4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are on the face of it highly improbable. He points out that an earlier First Information Report was lodged on 01.05.2012 in Pandarak P.S. Case No. 57/2012 at the instance of Ratnakar Tripathi, one of the employees of Gangotri Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. with regard to the very same occurrence It is further submitted that the present First Information Report suffers from self-contradiction. While it has been stated therein that on being Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36690 of 2012 (2) dt.19-09-2012 chased the accused persons managed to get away under cover of darkness, at the same time it has also been stated that in the light emanating from the burning dumper, as many as twenty FIR-named accused including the petitioner were identified. He further points out that the present First Information Report is highly doubtful considering that even though the same appears to have been made out on 1st May, 2012, it has been seen and signed by the court officer much later on 5.5.2012, which casts substantial doubt. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to give the benefit of bail to the above named petitioner on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barh (District-Patna) in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case No. 58 of 2012 on the following conditions- (i) That the petitioner will not indulge himself in any similar or other offence. (ii) One of the bailors must be a close relative of the petitioner. (iii) The petitioner will be well represented on each and every date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned. Fahad. ( Vikash Jain, J. )

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.