Allowed

Raju Kumar Goswami @ Raju Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC2 Mar 2022CR. MISC./3485/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court granted bail to two petitioners accused of offences under the Arms Act and IPC. The court noted a lack of specific allegations and incriminating evidence, directing their release on a bond with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Enlarged the petitioners on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 25000 with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions.

Raju Kumar Goswami @ Raju Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39792 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2021 Thana- RAMKRISHNANAGAR District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

SHUBHAM KUMAR @ SHUBHAM SINGH S/O RANDHIR KUMAR @ RANDHIR SINGH R/o Mohalla- Ram Krishna Nagar Near L.P. Shahi College, P.S.- Ram Krishna Nagar, Distt.- Patna

... ... Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party

¶9

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

¶10

with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 3485 of 2022

¶11

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2021 Thana- RAMKRISHNANAGAR District- Patna

¶12

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

¶13

RAJU KUMAR GOSWAMI @ RAJU KUMAR S/o Jagnath Goswami Resident of Mohalla- New Bangali Tola, Devi Sthan, P.S.- Jakkanpur, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party

¶18

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

¶19

Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 39792 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gauri Shankar Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs.Renu Kumari, A.P.P. (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 3485 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Ranjan Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman, A.P.P

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

3 02-03-2022

¶24

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶25

Both the aforesaid applications arise out of Ram Krishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 21 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 323, 307/34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Therefore, both the aforesaid applications have been heard together and are

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39792 of 2021(3) dt.02-03-2022 2/3

¶27

being disposed of by this common order.

¶28

Let the defect(s) be removed within two weeks of the

¶29

complete start of the physical Court in normal course.

¶30

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 10.012021 at 11.55 A.M. when informant reached near I.C.I.C.I Bank, all the accused persons named in the F.I.R., including the petitioners, surrounded him and shot fire in his chest.

¶31

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the there are general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners. He further submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case as from the injury, it appears that there is only one injury found on the person of injured. He further submits that in course of investigation, nothing incriminating evidence has been collected against the petitioners. The petitioners are in custody since 05.02.2021 and 10.09.2021, respectively.

¶32

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶33

Considering the aforementioned facts and

¶34

circumstances of the case, there is no specific allegation has been attributed against the petitioners, the petitioners, above named, are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

¶35

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39792 of 2021(3) dt.02-03-2022 3/3

¶36

bond of Rs. 25000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-cum-Sub-Judge-XIII, Patna, in connection with Ram Krishna Nagar P.S. Case No.21 of 2021, subject to the following conditions:-

¶37

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned.

¶38

(2) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court.

¶39

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

¶40

(4) If the petitioners are found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall take steps to cancel his bail bonds.

¶41

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶42

manish/-

¶43

U T

Raju Kumar Goswami @ Raju Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Kumar Goswami @ Raju 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranjit Kumar @ Badha Paswan @ Badhu Paswan Vs the State of Bihar

Babita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Indrajit Das @ Jitu Khatbe Vs the State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vimal Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Jai Prakash Pathak Vs the State of Bihar