The Patna High Court disposed of three bail applications arising from a robbery and murder case. Rejecting the petitioners' claims of innocence and regarding the inadmissibility of confessional statements, the court refused bail due to recovered evidence and the petitioners' status as habitual offenders.
Prayer for grant of bail is rejected.
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.67482 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2021 Thana- JADIA District- Supaul
======================================================
RAJESH KUMAR @ RAJESH KUMAR MANDAL, Son of Bhalji Mandal Resident of Village- Parsagarhi uttar, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Jadia, District- Supaul, Permanent resident of Majarhat, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 71266 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2021 Thana- JADIA District- Supaul
======================================================
SHRAWAN KUMAR @ SARVAN KUMAR Son of Maheshwari Mandal Resident of village - Parsagarhi, P.S. - Jadia, District - Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 23240 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2021 Thana- JADIA District- Supaul ====================================================== PAPPU YADAV @ PAPPU KUMAR S/o Gajendra Yadav Resident of Village - Tamua, Bhatani Tola, P.S. - Chhatapur, District - Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 67482 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Durga Nand Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umesh Lal Verma, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 71266 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Durga Nand Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umesh Lal Verma,APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 23240 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
... ... Opposite Party/s
Since three cases arise out of Jadia P.S. Case No. 24 of
3 14-09-2022
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67482 of 2021(3) dt.14-09-2022 2/3
2021 as such, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from the date of resumption of physical filing and physical removal of defect.
In the present case, the petitioners seek bail in connection with Jadia P.S. Case No. 24 of 2021 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 394, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
As per prosecution case, unknown miscreants looted cash amount of Rs. 45 lakhs from the Cash Officer of a private company who had been going to replenish the cash in ATMs and the guard was also shot at who later on succumbed to his injuries. The name of the petitioners transpired as accused persons during investigation.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They are not named in F.I.R. and nothing incriminating have been recovered from their possession. The petitioners have not been put to any Test Identification Parade. Except for confessional statement, there is nothing against the accused persons and the confessional statement is not admissible in evidence. It has been further submitted on behalf of the petitioners that whatever recovery of cash has been shown it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67482 of 2021(3) dt.14-09-2022 3/3
not the looted money and moreover, the recovery is not from the active possession of the petitioners. Learned counsel further submits that the recovered cash was also not put to T.I.P. to ascertain the fact that it was the same cash which was looted. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case and the petitioners are in custody since 13.03.2021, 13.03.2021 and 02.09.2021, respectively.
Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners submitting that the petitioners are habitual offenders and recovery of the looted cash have been made from the petitioners. Paragraph 187, 188, 194, 196 and 207 of the case diary show that the recovery has been made at the instance of the petitioners except for petitioner Pappu Yadav but from the house of this petitioner recovery of looted cash has been made.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances and considering the recovery of part of cash and looted cash from the petitioners, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail at this stage.
Accordingly, their prayer for grant of bail is rejected.
The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a year.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Gautam/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners should be enlarged on bail given the recovery of looted cash from their possession and their prior criminal record.
Whether the prayer for bail in the three merged criminal miscellaneous cases should be allowed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
RAJESH KUMAR @ RAJESH KUMAR MANDAL
SHRAWAN KUMAR @ SARVAN KUMAR
PAPPU YADAV @ PAPPU KUMAR
THE STATE OF BIHAR
ARUN KUMAR JHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
