Allowed

Sachitanand Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Nov 2022CR. MISC./41304/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge bench of the Patna High Court granted regular bail to four petitioners, relatives of a scrap shop proprietor and accused in a stolen iron bridge case punishable under IPC Sections 379, 409, 406, 411, and 120-B, directing payment of Rs. 10,000 as bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each.

Sachitanand Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41304 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2022 Thana- NASRIGANJ District- Rohtas

¶3

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

¶4

Sachitanand Singh S/O Late Ram Sundar Singh R/O Village- Gopigarh, P.S.Akorahigola, District- Rohtas

¶5

Manish Kumar S/O Dilip Singh R/O Village- Gopigarh, P.S.- Akorahigola, District- Rohtas

¶6

Chandan Kumar S/O Ram Naresh Singh R/O Village- Chanda Bigha, P.S.Akorahigola, District- Rohtas

¶7

Gopal Kumar S/O Yamuna Prasad R/O Village- Jainagar, P.S.- Akorahigola, District- Rohtas

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶12

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

¶13

Appearance :

¶14

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP

¶15

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

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶17

2 09-11-2022

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

¶19

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

¶20

Petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Nasariganj P.S. Case No. 45 of 2022 registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently added Sections 409, 406, 411 and 120(B) of I.P.C.

¶21

As per the prosecution, the informant in his fardbeyan

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41304 of 2022(2) dt.09-11-2022 2/4

¶23

has alleged that an iron bridge which was not in use and was in deplorable condition was stolen by some unknown persons and upon inquiring from the villagers the accused persons told that they were removing it on an official order.

¶24

The main submissions advanced by the learned counsel Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh appearing for the petitioners are that the FIR of the instant matter was lodged against unknown persons, the petitioners have clean antecedent and are relatives of each other and the brother of petitioner No.1 is proprietor of scrap shop( kabari) which was being run in the name of M/s. Aditya Traders, in fact the alleged wrong of cutting and misappropriating the old bridge was committed by some other persons in collusion with officials of irrigation department concerned and in this regard statement of coaccused Arvind Kumar who is a seasonal employee of irrigation department is very relevant who disclosed in his statement that in his presence in following with the direction of the SDO of irrigation department the act of cutting of bridge was committed by one namely Chhotu Shah and six to seven persons of mechanical department of canal and the said statement of Arvind Kumar is sufficient to show that the employees as well as officers of irrigation department were involved in cutting and

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41304 of 2022(2) dt.09-11-2022 3/4

¶26

removing the alleged bridge. Further submission is that three coaccused persons namely Gandhi Chaudhary, Chandan Kumar and Radhe Shyam Singh, SDO of irrigation department have been granted bail by different Co-ordinate bench of this Court Vide Order passed in Cr. Misc No.38494 of 2022, Cr. Misc No.37656 of 2022 and Cr. Misc No.37901of 2022 respectively.

¶27

Learned APP Mr. Uday Pratap Singh appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer.

¶28

In view of above submissions and mainly considering the petitioners’ clean antecedent mentioned in their petition and their custody period and also the fact that some co-accused persons are on bail granted by Co-ordinate bench of this Court vide orders passed in above mentioned Cr. Misc. cases and petitioners have taken the defense that the employees as well as officers of irrigation department were involved in cutting and removing the alleged bridge and also the fact that the petitioners are stated to be relatives of one who is proprietor of the scrap shop, in the opinion of this Court a lenient approach can be taken in respect of petitioners’ prayer, let the petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court in connection with

¶29

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41304 of 2022(2) dt.09-11-2022 4/4

¶30

Nasariganj P.S. Case No. 45 of 2022 on the following conditions.

¶31

(1) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court below and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court below and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶32

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

¶33

(3) One of the bailers shall be a close relative of the petitioners who has sworn affidavit in this miscellaneous petition.

¶34

(Shailendra Singh, J.)

¶35

murli/-

¶36

U T

Sachitanand Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachitanand Singh 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

Vikki Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Yadav @ Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Yadav @ Pramod Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bijay Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Upendra Prasad Mehta Vs The State of Bihar through Viglance Deptt. , Govt. of Bihar.

Ram Vinay Sahani Vs The State of Bihar