Anticipatory bail granted to alleged accomplices in a theft case involving the purchase of a stolen pump-set, subject to appearance conditions and a monetary bond.
Petitioners to be enlarged on bail on appearance within four weeks on furnishing bond of Rs. 15,000 each with two sureties.
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.18299 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2019 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani
======================================================
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raj Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Narendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP representing the State.
Petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 10 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379 and 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioners is that they have purchased the stolen pump-set from the co-accused Anil Yadav.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the names of the petitioners have transpired in the confessional statement of co-accused Anil Yadav. It is submitted that the stolen pump-set has been recovered from the house of one Upendra Mukhiya and not these petitioners. It is further stated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18299 of 2019(2) dt.04-04-2019 2/2
that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent.
Learned APP for the State is present and has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case wherein it is alleged that the main accused Anil Yadav had sold the stolen pump-set to one Upendra Mukhiya and the recovery of the said pump-set has been made from the house of Upendra Mukhiya and not these petitioners and the FIR is only confined to the theft of pump-set and not of battery and the electric motor with regard to which in course of investigation the allegations have been made against these petitioners but nothing has been recovered from their house, in case of arrest or surrender of the petitioners within a period of four weeks from today, the abovenamed petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 10 of 2019, subject to the condition prescribed under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
arvind/-
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail in a theft case where the stolen property was not recovered from their premises.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajendra Mukhiya and Rajkumar Yadav
The State of Bihar
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
