Single judge order granting bail to a petitioner accused under Section 379 IPC who was lodged in judicial custody. Bail was granted on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.
Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.11852 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2017 Thana- PATAHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Krishna Rai, son of Ravindra Rai, Resident of Village- Marpa Kothi Mohan, P.S.- Phenhara, District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER
3 04-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned A.P.P. for the State.
Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 30.11.2017 in connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 31 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, is that he had parked his motorcycle at his door, which was found missing.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and not named in the First Information Report. His name surfaced on the confessional statement of co-accused Shivam Kumar before the police, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. He submits that
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11852 of 2018(3) dt.04-04-2018 2/3
nothing has been recovered from his possession and that petitioner is a student of B. Com Part-II and charge-sheet has already been submitted.
However, learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating therein that the petitioner does not have clean antecedent and one more case of similar nature is pending against him.
Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let the petitioner, named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate8th, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 31 of 2017, subject to the conditions that:
(1) Both the bailors would be close relative of the petitioner having sufficient immovable properties, who will file an affidavit stating their relationship with the petitioner.
(2) It is also made clear that if, in future, petitioner indulges in an offence of similar nature, the prosecution will be at
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11852 of 2018(3) dt.04-04-2018 3/3
liberty to move the learned Court below for
cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Nilu Agrawal, J.)
Arjun/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail in the case under Section 379 IPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Krishna Rai
The State of Bihar
Nilu Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
