Allowed

Md. Kalam @ Bhutto v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Aug 2022CR. MISC./17810/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of two connected criminal miscellaneous petitions seeking bail in respect of Bheja P.S. Case No. 82 of 2020 involving abduction and murder. Finding a distinct lack of material, the Court directed the petitioners to be released on bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of the like amount.

Md. Kalam @ Bhutto Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64512 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2020 Thana- BHEJA District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

MD. LIYAKAT @ MD. LIYAKAT ALI SHEKH @ LIYAKAT SEKH Son of Md. Late Amod Ali Resident of Village - Kazipara, P.S.- Reji Nagar, District - Murshidabad, West Bengal.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

with

¶11

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 17810 of 2022

¶12

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2020 Thana- BHEJA District- Madhubani

¶13

====================================================== MD. KALAM @ BHUTTO Son of Md. Dhodhay Resident of village - Mahpatiya, P.S.- Bheja, District - Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

3 24-08-2022

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 64512 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rashid Izhar, Advocate For the State : Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 17810 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶18

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶19

Since both the applications arise out of Bheja P.S. Case No. 82 of 2020 as such, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

¶20

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

¶21

Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64512 of 2021(3) dt.24-08-2022 2/4

¶23

removed within a period of four weeks from the date of resumption of physical filing and physical removal of defect.

¶24

In the present case, the petitioners seek bail in connection with Bheja P.S. Case No. 82 of 2020 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 364 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶25

As per prosecution case, the brother of the informant went missing with his motorcycle and Rs. 70,000/- in cash. The informant named the petitioners who conspired with co-accused persons and abducted his brother with intention to kill him.

¶26

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have been named in this case merely on suspicion of the informant. During whole investigation, nothing of substance came up against petitioners. For an occurrence dated 29.09.2020, the FIR has been registered on 08.10.2020. Except for confessional statement of petitioner Md. Liyakat, there is nothing against the petitioners. The recovery of motorcycle of the brother of the petitioner was made from one Md. Ershad and said co-accused was granted bail vide order dated 02.03.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 41224/2021 by a Coordinate Bench. The police did not verify the claim of the informant that brother of the informant was called by the petitioner Md. Liyakat. No

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64512 of 2021(3) dt.24-08-2022 3/4

¶28

recovery has been made at the instance of the petitioner. There is no witness who might have seen the petitioner with the deceased. Against the petitioner Md.Kalam, it has only come during investigation that family members of co-accused Md. Ershad stated that the motorcycle was sold to the co-accused by petitioner Md. Kalam. Thus, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that hardly any material has come up against this petitioner to connect them with the occurrence of missing of the brother of the informant who has not been recovered so far. The petitioners are in custody since 11.10.2020 and 04.02.2021, respectively. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case.

¶29

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners submitting that the petitioners have been named in the FIR and they have confessed their crime that they administered some intoxicating liquid to the brother of the informant, looted his motorcycle and Rs. 70,000/- cash and threw unconscious brother of the informant in a river.

¶30

Having regard to the submission made on behalf of the parties and further considering the fact that there is distinct lack of material against the petitioners to connect them with the alleged occurrence and also the period of custody and submission of charge sheet, the petitioners above named are

¶31

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64512 of 2021(3) dt.24-08-2022 4/4

¶32

directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-3, Jhanjharpur in connection with Bheja P.S. Case No 82 of 2020, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also the following conditions:

¶33

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

¶34

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.

¶35

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

¶36

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶37

Gautam/-

¶38

U T

Md. Kalam @ Bhutto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Kalam @ Bhutto 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Himansu Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Kanhaiya @ Kanhaiya Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Amal Kishore Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Anand Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Dhamiya @ Dharambir Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Suman Kumar Vs The State of Bihar