Allowed

Birchand Mahto @ Virendra Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Jun 2020CR. MISC./6644/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner on personal bond due to COVID-19 lockdown. Petitioner held in custody since 2.11.2019 in a kidnapping case but not named in FIR. Bail bonds to be furnished after normalcy is restored.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on personal bond to satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate. Bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties to be furnished within four weeks after normalcy is restored.

Birchand Mahto @ Virendra Mahto Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6644 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2019 Thana- KUTUMBA District- Aurangabad

¶3

======================================================

¶4

BIRCHAND MAHTO @ VIRENDRA MAHTO Son of Late Swarath Mahto Resident of Village - Bhaluwar Kala, P.S.- Amba, Dist.- Aurangabad. (Bihar)

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjit Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Anurag Singh ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 05-06-2020

¶12

Due to COVID-19 Pandemic, the matter is being taken up by way of Virtual Court proceeding.

¶13

The matter has been listed under the heading ‘For Orders’ under the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

The prosecution case in short is that the husband of the informant was forcibly kidnapped by the accused persons.

¶17

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 2.11.2019 and has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. Charge-sheet has been

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6644 of 2020(3) dt.05-06-2020 2/2

¶19

submitted in the present case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. On recovery, the statement of the victim has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which he has not named the petitioner. The name of the petitioner has transpired on the basis of confession of co-accused. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest his implication in the present case.

¶20

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R..

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the lockdown, the petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in connection with Kutumba P.S. Case No. 161 of 2019.

¶22

Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of four weeks to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶23

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶24

Pankaj/-

¶25

U T

Birchand Mahto @ Virendra Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birchand Mahto @ Virendra Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Kishore Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Murari Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar @ Vikesh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Gunja Kumari @ Juli @ Shivani Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Naushad Vs The State of Bihar

Vinesh Tudu @ Binesh Tudu Vs the State of Bihar