Allowed

Devendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Sept 2022CR. MISC./26724/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous petition, the Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner. The petitioner was in custody since 17.08.2021 for alleged offences under Section 392 IPC. The court noted he was not named in the FIR and relied on the submitted charge sheet to grant bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of the petitioner on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arwal.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26724 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2021 Thana- ARWAL District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

DEVENDRA KUMAR SON OF UMESH PASWAN @ UMESH KUMAR PASWAN R/ O-VILL- PIPARI, P.S.-AGRER DISTRICT_ROHTAS

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar BIHAR

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramesh Chandra ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 05-09-2022

¶12

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

¶13

removed within a period of four weeks from today.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶15

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Arwal P.S. Case No. 37 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

As per prosecution case, informant is driver-cumowner of Swift Dzire car bearing no. BR-01PK-9085 who has alleged that some unknown miscreants are said to have hired his vehicle at Patna Junction to proceed towards Bikram and when the informant alongwith the aforesaid miscreants reached near Chiraura, in the way, the said miscreants pointed pistol and snatched Rs. 4500/-, his mobile set alongwith the car of the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26724 of 2022(2) dt.05-09-2022 2/3

¶18

informant by dropping him on Arwal Canal Road at about 02:30 AM.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 17.08.2021. Petitioner bears one criminal antecedent of similar nature. Charge sheet has already been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. Learned counsel further submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. Name of present petitioner came during the course investigation at para 38 of the case diary and the petitioner was remanded from another case i.e. Karpi P.S. Case No. 24 of 2021 as mentioned in the impugned order. Petitioner was not put on TIP.

¶20

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. nature of allegation, charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26724 of 2022(2) dt.05-09-2022 3/3

¶23

Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arwal, District Arwal in connection with Arwal P.S. Case No. 37 of 2021, subject to following conditions:-

¶24

(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

¶25

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶26

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶27

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶28

amitkr/-

¶29

U T

Devendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sinder Singh @ Hari Singh @ Sonu Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Kumar Kesari @ Vijay Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Chhotelal Mandal Vs the State of Bihar

Jitendra Rai @ Jitendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shatrughan Singh @ Shatrughan Kumar @ Shatrughan @ Jataha @ Jhtaha Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Choudhary @Rahul Kumar Choudhary @Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar