Allowed

Driver MD Rizwan @ MD Rizwan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC12 May 2022CR. MISC./29598/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted bail to a driver (appellant) accused of murder and offences under the Arms Act. The court allowed the release on bail noting the absence of connecting evidence other than confessional statements hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed. Released on bail on executing P.R. bond of Rs. 10,000/- with conditional surety and standard bail conditions regarding threats and contacting witnesses.

Driver MD Rizwan @ MD Rizwan Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29598 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2019 Thana- ASHOK PAPER MILL DistrictDarbhanga

¶3

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

¶4

Driver Md Rizwan @ Md Rizwan, Son of Md. Gulab Resident of VillageBilashpur, P.S.- Hayaghat, District- Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhusudan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Mustaque Alam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. M. BADAR ORAL ORDER

¶9

11 12-05-2022

¶10

The applicant/accused in Crime No. 180 of 2019 registered with A.P.M Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 120(B) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act, by this application is seeking his release on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶11

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant/accused. He argued that there is no iota of evidence to connect the applicant to the crime in question.

¶12

On the behalf of the State, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor argued that Md. Bilal had seen the applicant in company of the deceased and they were going towards Darbhanga. He has spoken about giving lift to co-accused Md.

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29598 of 2021(11) dt.12-05-2022 2/4

¶14

Anirul and Md. Rabbani.

¶15

I have considered the submissions so advanced and also perused the materials placed before me including the counter affidavit by the State.

¶16

The incident in question took place on 03.12.2019. Deceased Md. Shaif @ Munna is son of the first informant Md. Basir. According to the prosecution case, Md. Shaif @ Munna was going by his Scorpio vehicle with his driver Md. Rizwan, i.e. the present applicant. On the way, co-accused Md. Anirul and Md. Rabbani took lift and sat in that vehicle. The prosecution alleged that thereafter Md. Shaif @ Munna was killed by firing a gunshot at him.

¶17

The applicant, even according to the prosecution case was driver of the deceased Md. Shaif @ Munna. According to the prosecution case, co-accused Md. Anirul and Md. Rabbani were given lift in the vehicle by deceased Md. Shaif @ Munna. Therefore, it is but natural that the applicant being driver of that vehicle would be found in company of his employer Md. Shaif @ Munna as well as two passengers Md. Anirul and Md. Rabbani to whom the lift was apparently given by deceased Md. Shaif @ Munna.

¶18

Evidence against the applicant, according to the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29598 of 2021(11) dt.12-05-2022 3/4

¶20

prosecution case is that of confessional statement of accused persons which are undoubtedly hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act. Apart from this, there is no other evidence worth mentioning in the subject crime against the applicant. Therefore, further pretrial detention of the present applicant is not warranted and hence, the order :-

¶21

i. The application is allowed.

¶22

ii. The applicant/accused in Crime No. 180 of 2019 registered with A.P.M Police Station be released on bail on executing P.R. bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) on furnishing surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with the following conditions: -

¶23

(I) The applicant/accused should not extend any threat, promise of inducement to the persons acquainted with the facts of the accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶24

(II) The applicant/accused should cooperate the trail court in expeditious disposal of the trial against him.

¶25

(III) The applicant/accused should not contact the members of the prosecuting party as well as witnesses in this case in any manner till conclusion of the trial.

¶26

(IV) The applicant should not repeat

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29598 of 2021(11) dt.12-05-2022 4/4

¶28

commission of similar offence in future and if he is found to be involved in commission of similar offence, the State is at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail granted to the applicant in the instant case.

¶29

The applicant to remove all office objections forthwith and the Registry to issue the certified copy of this order only after removal of office objections by the appellant/accused.

¶30

Bhardwaj/- (A. M. Badar, J)

¶31

U T

Driver MD Rizwan @ MD Rizwan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Driver MD Rizwan @ MD Rizwan 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

Ranjeet Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Dinesh Vishwakarma Vs the State of Bihar

Ajay Das Vs The State of Bihar

Shreya and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Soni Pandey @ Sundeshwer Pandey Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Kedar Rai Vs The State Of Bihar, Through The District Magistrate, Samastipur.