A criminal miscellaneous application for regular bail was disposed of. The court denied bail at this stage despite the petitioner claiming false implication, reserving the decision upon framing of charges.
Bail prayer rejected; petitioner to be released to trial court satisfaction post-charges upon condition of co-operation.
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.48146 of 2018
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -548 Year- 2017 Thana -MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMUZAFFARPUR
====================================================== 1. Ajit Kumar S/o Bechan Rai resident of Village - Barmatpur, P.S. - Kanti, District - Muzaffarpur.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K., Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER
2 27-09-2018 Heard the parties.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sadar P.S.Case No. 548 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 328/379 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegation as per F.I.R. is that the petitioner along with others is of theft the Mahindra Pick-up van after giving poisonous and intoxicating drugs to the driver by mixing in spirit and the name of the petitioner transpires during course of investigation. It is further alleged that from perusal of para No.-64 it reveals that one witness has named the petitioner.
Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated and nothing has
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48146 of 2018 (2) dt.27-09-2018
2/2
been found against the petitioner to rope in the case without basis and petitioner has no concern with the co-accused and he is in custody since 12.04.2018.
Heard learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail..
Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, at this stage, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, however once charge has been framed and trial commence, he will be released to the satisfaction of the trail court on condition that he will co-operate in disposal of trial.
This application is accordingly disposed of.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)
Sudha/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether regular bail should be granted at this stage to the petitioner implicated in a theft case with specific allegations against him.
Ajit Kumar
The State of Bihar
Vinod Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
