Petition to cancel bail granted to respondent Ranjit Yadav based on allegations of concealing a prior arms charge and threatening the informant. Court found no evidence of threat or tampering as per investigating officer. Bail remains intact.
Petition for cancellation of bail dismissed; bail of Ranjit Yadav remains operative.
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.24662 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-311 Year-2013 Thana- SHEKHPURA District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
Basanti Devi Wife of Late Manik Yadav, Resident of Village- Pathlapar, P.S.Sheikhpura, District- Sheikhpura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arjun Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 30-01-2019 Heard both sides.
The petitioner has filed this petition for cancellation
of bail granted to the opposite party no.2 Ranjit Yadav on 18.11.2016 in Cr. Misc. No.31645 of 2016.
Learned counsel for the petitioner (informant) submits that the opposite party no.2 has concealed the fact that he was an accused in Sheikhpura P.S. Case No.23 of 2016 registered under different sections of the Arms Act. It is submitted that after coming out from the custody the opposite party no.2 threatened the petitioner (informant) of dire consequence, if the informant would depose against the opposite party no.2 Ranjit Yadav and for that an F.I.R. is also lodged.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24662 of 2018(5) dt.30-01-2019 2/2
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, on the other hand, submits that the he has already mentioned in the bail petition about Sheikhpura P.S. Case No.23 of 2016 but due to inadvertence wrong section has been mentioned. The opposite party no.2 Ranjit Yadav never threatened the petitioner (informant) and a false case has been lodged against him.
Taking into the consideration the fact that from perusal of record it appears that opposite party no.2 Ranjit Yadav was earlier granted bail as all other accused persons similarly situated were granted bail. There is no finding to this fact that the Ranjit Yadav ever threatened the informant The case lodged by the informant is still pending before the Investigating Officer and the Investigating Officer has not come to a definite finding about the opposite party no.2 Ranjit Yadav that he made any attempt to tamper with the evidence. Thus, I find no case is made out for cancellation of bail of the opposite party no.2 Ranjit Yadav.
Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)
Harish/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail granted to the opposite party should be cancelled on allegations of concealment of prior arrest and threat to the informant.
Whether the allegations of tampering with evidence and filing a false FIR are sufficient grounds to revoke the bail.
Basanti Devi
State of Bihar
Ranjit Yadav
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
