Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 37007 of 2012 ====================================================== Satish Singh @ Satish Kumar Singh Son of Rabendar Singh resident of Village – Gorakhari, P.S. Bikram, District- Patna. ... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. For the Opposite Party : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 2. 30-10-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Bikram P.S. Case No. 183 of 1995 registered for offence punishable under [STATUTE] . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the F.I.R. is so frivolous that the petitioner upon institution of the F.I.R. surrendered before the A.C.J.M., Danapur in the year 1995 itself and was also granted bail. He submits that the case was committed to sessions in the year 1996 and thereafter the petitioner kept making regular ‘Parvi’ in the case till the year 2002 and thereafter being a poor labourer and seeking livelihood outside the State entrusted an advocate clerk to make regular ‘Parvi’ on his behalf. It is submitted that due to such Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37007 of 2012 (2) dt.30-10-2012 2 / 2 2 misconception and ignorance the petitioner’s bail bond was cancelled on 21.02.2003 and the petitioner all along was unaware of the same and suddenly, before he could surrender was taken into custody on 28.08.2012. Learned counsel submits that even on merit the F.I.R. is unbelievable and there is no substance in the same much less any ingredient with regard to [STATUTE] . There is only general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner along with others of firing without there being any injury and further allegation of theft and that too of petty articles. Learned A.P.P. for the State submits that this is a case of misuse of the privilege of bail and thus bail should not be granted. Upon hearing learned counsels for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge I Danapur, Patna in connection with S. Tr. No. 761 of 1996. The petitioner shall be represented on each and every date fixed and absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient cause shall be a ground for cancellation of bail in the present case. Anand Kr. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, 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.