This court rejected the petitioner's bail application in a bank dacoity case involving Sections 395 and 397 IPC. Despite claims of false implication, bail was denied with a direction to conclude the trial within nine months.
Bail application rejected; trial directed to conclude within nine months.
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.14857 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2018 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
SIDHAYANT KUMAR @ LALU Son of Anand Kumar Singh @ Tuna Singh Resident of Village - Karehon, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramesh Chandra ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
3 23-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code.
Prosecution allegation , in short, is that the accused persons committed bank dacoity and approx Rs. 10,61,000/lacs looted from the bank.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 14.6.2018. Chargesheet/prosecution report has been submitted in this case. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The petitioner has not been put on T.I.P.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14857 of 2019(3) dt.23-07-2019 2/2
On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the case relates to bank dacoity. Approximately 10 lacs rupees have been looted from the bank and from the possession of the petitioner Rs. 17,100/- along with one country made pistol, one live cartridge have been recovered.
Considering the aforesaid, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 110 of 2018. The same is rejected. The Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial at the earliest preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
Pankaj/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner charged with offences under Sections 395 and 397 IPC in a bank dacoity case.
Whether the petitioner's claim of false implication warrants release on bail.
Under what direction the Trial Court should conclude the trial.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sidhayant Kumar @ Lalu
The State of Bihar
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
