On a criminal miscellaneous petition, the High Court granted bail to a petitioner accused of murder and robbery-related offences, ordering him to furnish a bail bond and two sureties.
Petitioner to be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 and 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.24903 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2019 Thana- PHENHARA District- East Champaran
======================================================
RAJIV KUMAR, aged about 40 years (M), Son of Ramakant Singh, Resident of Village-Kumharar, P.S.- Fenhara, District-East Champaran.
| The State of Bihar | Versus | |
|---|---|---|
| =============== | ==== | ... ... Opposite Party =================================== |
| Appearance : For the Petitioner For the State For the Informant =============== |
: : : ==== |
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, A.P.P. Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate. ================================== |
| CORAM: HONOU | RABL | E MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER |
5 23-08-2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner is languishing in custody since 15.02.2019 in a case for the offence registered under Sections 394, 302, 120(B)/34 of the IPC and 27 of the Arms Act.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that the uncle of the informant Manoj Kumar Akela used to run S.B.I. Customer Service Centre at his Darwaza . On 11.02.2019 at about 1.00 P.M., he went from his house for bank work. According to knowledge, he went for bringing cash. In the meantime, at about 3.00 P.M., the informant came to know that his Manoj uncle sustained firearm injuries. On information, when he went to the place of occurrence, he found his uncle unconscious. He was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24903 of 2019(5) dt.23-08-2019 2/3
admitted at Madhuban Hospital from there he was referred to S.K.M.C.H. Muzaffarpur where the doctor declared him dead. From the place of occurrence, Mobile No. 9334049000 of his uncle, cash, wrist watch and gold chain was missing. The informant suspected that the criminals might have killed his uncle due to cash of C.S.P. and jewellery.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. His name has come on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Ashutosh Kumar. Except for confessional statement of co-accused, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case.
On behalf of the learned counsels for the State and the informant, it has been submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 12th
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24903 of 2019(5) dt.23-08-2019 3/3
A.C.J.M., Motihari, East Champaran, in connection with Fenhara P.S. Case No. 6 of 2019.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
U.K./-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, languishing in custody, should be granted bail in a case involving offences under Sections 394, 302, and 120(B)/34 of the IPC.
Whether the burden of furnishing security and sureties for bail has been satisfactorily met.
Whether the arguable ground of fake implication and lack of FIR nomenclature warrants relief.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajiv Kumar
The State of Bihar
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
