Abhishek Kumar @ Bittu vs State Of Jharkhand

When the matter is called out, both counsels have appeared. This Cr.M.P. has been filed for modification of order dated 03.03.2017 passed by this Court in ABA No. 653 of 2016 by which petitioner was granted anticipatory bail and was directed to surrender within three weeks.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is only the relative of Upendra Singh, who was on inimical terms with the deceased in regard to plying of buses. He has further submitted that this petitioner is apprehending his arrest in this case only because the name of this petitioner tallies with the name of one of the miscreants, namely, Abhishek Kumar who arranged to commit the offfence. He has further submitted that the petitioner has been chargesheeted in the year 2018 and has not been declared absconder till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is residing in Patna with his mother, wife and four children. He has not violated the order of the Court deliberately and is ready to pay any fine amount imposed by this Court.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that petitioner has not complied with the earlier terms and conditions as laid down by this Court. He further submitted that grounds made in the affidavit filed by the petitioner is not at all sufficient to extend the period of surrender.

Having heard both counsels and having gone through the materials available before this Court it appears that petitioner was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 03.03.2017 passed in ABA No. 653 of 2016 but the petitioner has not approached the concerned court as yet. Therefore, this Court directs that the order dated 03.03.2017 passed in ABA No. 653 of 2016 stands cancelled. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the learned court below within a period of three weeks from today. He is entitled to approach the learned court below for moving the bail petition again which shall be considered on merits.

Accordingly, Cr.M.P. No. 324 of 2021 stands rejected. However, the learned Court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and will not be prejudice by the order of this Court.