Allowed

Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Aug 2022CR. MISC./15515/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner accused under the IPC of burglary. The release was conditional on the statement that no looted articles were recovered from him, with bail becoming infructuous if otherwise found. Several standard bail conditions were imposed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail Rs.10,000 with two sureties of similar amount, subject to conditions regarding appearance and non-interference. Bail becomes infructuous if loot is recovered.

Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15515 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2021 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria

¶3

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

¶4

Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar, Son of Brahamdeo Singh Resident of village - Amani, P.S.- Mansi, District - Khagaria.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP ======================================================

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 16-08-2022

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶10

APP for the State.

¶11

Let the defect(s) be removed within four weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course.

¶12

The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Sessions Trial No.308/2021 arising out of Mansi P.S. Case No.205/2021 instituted under Section 392,395,412 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

The allegation in the FIR is that four unknown persons barged into the home of the informant and looted 800 Grams of silver worth Rs.40,000/- and 110 Grams of gold worth value of five lacks rupees and cash of Rs.25,000/- besides.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case was lodged against unknown. Subsequently, the police picked him and forced to make confessional statement accepting participation in the present case. He has made a categorical statement in paragraph 7

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15515 of 2022(3) dt.16-08-2022 2/3

¶16

& 8 that neither any TIP has been done nor any looted article has been recovered from his possession. He submits that he is in custody since 25.09.2021 (as stated in para-7 of the bail application). He lastly submits that some of the co-accused have since been granted bail vide Cr. Misc. No.20965 of 2022 (Sulendra Paswan @ Surendra Paswan vs. The State of Bihar) on 08.08.2022, Cr. Misc. No.64749 of 2021 (Saroj Kumar vs. The State of Bihar) on 19.04.2022, Cr. Misc. No.64090 of 2021 (Saroj Kumar vs. The State of Bihar) on 08.04.2022. Let the same be kept on the record.

¶17

Taking into account the categorical statement made by the petitioner that despite his alleged self-confession before the police, nothing has been recovered relating to the present case either from his possession or from his house and no TI Parade has been done, is in jail since 25.09.2021, charge-sheet stands submitted and others have been granted the privilege of bail, this Court is inclined to release him on bail. If, however, it is found that contrary to the statement made by him, anything was recovered relating to the present loot, this bail order shall become infructuous.

¶18

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Sessions Trial No.308/2021 arising out of Mansi P.S. Case No.205/2021 to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge, IV, Khagaria, subject to following conditions:

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15515 of 2022(3) dt.16-08-2022 3/3

¶20

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioner, who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

¶21

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reasons will entail cancellation of his bail by the Trial court itself;

¶22

(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every month for one year to mark his presence;

¶23

(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidence, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds;

¶24

(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty to steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

¶25

With the aforesaid observations, the bail application is allowed.

¶26

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶27

Prakash Narayan /- U T

Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Karu Koda @ Ajit Kumar Koda Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Kashif Vs The State of Bihar

Om Singh @ Rishi Raj Vs The State of Bihar

Bablu Dharkar Vs the State of Bihar

Sameer Kumar Vs The State of Bihar