Allowed

Nityanand Jha @ N.N Jha v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Nov 2022CR. MISC./41401/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application arising from a case under IPC Sections 420, 385, 504, 500 and IT Act Sections 66(D) and 67, the Court released the petitioner on bail after hearing both parties. The Court considered the petitioner's clean antecedents and the filed charge sheet.

What did the court decide?

Release of petitioner on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions.

Nityanand Jha @ N.N Jha Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41401 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2020 Thana- RAHIKA District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

NITYANAND JHA @ N.N JHA Son of Ashok Jha Resident of villageRaghopur, P.S.- Manigachi, District- Darbhanga

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Bharti For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rina Sinha ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 23-11-2022 Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office,

¶12

be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

¶13

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

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner filed supplementary affidavit, let it be kept on record.

¶15

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

¶16

Rahika P.S. Case No. 137 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 385, 504 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(D) and 67 of the Information and Technology Act, 2000.

¶17

As per prosecution case, allegation against the petitioner is that he tortured the informant by calling him

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41401 of 2022(3) dt.23-11-2022 2/4

¶19

from mobile no. 9262349218 and 9654473689. It is further alleged against the petitioner that the petitioner hacked the Facebook account of informant’s relative and his villager and used to share indecent messages to the informant’s wife and his daughter. It is further alleged that the petitioner demanded Rs. 2 lacs as ransom from the informant and threaten him to kill by sending him picture of pistol on Facebook.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 28.12.2021. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent. 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 the petitioner has never demanded any money neither uploaded nor tagged the pictures of the informant’s daughter or any of his family members and even did not threaten them. Learned counsel further submits that no specific date regarding the alleged occurrence is mentioned in the F.I.R. Learned counsel through supplementary affidavit further submits that the petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41401 of 2022(3) dt.23-11-2022 3/4

¶22

for ulterior reasons and also undertakes that the petitioner will not commit such type of offence in future.

¶23

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

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence, petitioner has also undertaken not to indulge in such activity in future, keeping in view clean antecedent of the petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of the parties 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 Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, District Madhubani in connection with Rahika P.S. Case No. 137 of 2020, subject to following conditions:-

¶25

(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.

¶26

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41401 of 2022(3) dt.23-11-2022 4/4

¶28

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.

¶29

(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.

¶30

(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offences in future, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail bond.

¶31

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶32

amitkr/-

¶33

U T

Nityanand Jha @ N.N Jha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nityanand Jha @ N.N Jha 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

Kamlesh Giri Vs The State of Bihar

Aazad Kumar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar through the Vigilance, Patna, Bihar

Sabrun Khatoon Vs The State of Bihar

Pradeep Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manish Kumar Maniranjan ( Prop. Kumkum Traders) Vs The State of Bihar