Allowed

Nagmani Singh v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Jun 2023CR. MISC./29580/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the petitioner in a case involving Section 392 IPC theft from a bank. The court ordered release after charge framing with monetary bonds and attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail after framing of charge upon furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of Rs. 10,000 each subject to specified attendance and legal conditions.

Nagmani Singh Vs the State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29580 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-408 Year-2021 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran

¶3

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

¶4

NAGMANI SINGH SON OF UDAY NARAYAN SINGH R/O VILLAGEDUMARI, P.S.- KHULIRA, DISTRICT- CHHAPRA (SARAN).

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shubhesh Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Narsingh Tanti ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 13-06-2023

¶12

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

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Marhowrah P.S. Case No. 408/2021 registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

As per prosecution case, Rs.2,70,000/- were looted by the miscreants from CSP Centre of Punjab National Bank situated at Tejpurwa and the case has been lodged against unknown.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and the name of petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Rajesh Singh. He further submits that except confessional statement of co-accused, there is nothing on record

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29580 of 2023(3) dt.13-06-2023 2/3

¶17

to demonstrate the complicity of the present petitioner with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner is languishing in custody since 21.08.2021 and bears criminal antecedent of 14 cases. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has not been put on T.I. Parade till now. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. Co-accused Dharmendra Tiwari on similar allegation has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No.16911/2022 and the case of present petitioner stands on similar footing.

¶18

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has several criminal antecedents.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, co-accused has already been granted bail, charge sheet has already been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence and argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail after framing of charge on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29580 of 2023(3) dt.13-06-2023 3/3

¶21

learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Saran (Chhapra) in connection with Marhowrah P.S. Case No. 408/2021, subject to following conditions:-

¶22

(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.

¶23

(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.

¶24

(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.

¶25

(iv) Petitioner shall furnish mobile number at the time of furnishing bail bond and the said mobile number shall continue in operating condition till disposal of the case and he shall get his presence marked before the officer-in-charge of the concerned police station on the first Tuesday of every month.

¶26

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶27

amitkumar/-

¶28

U T

Nagmani Singh v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagmani 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamlesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pradip Raut Vs The State of Bihar

Aishu Das Vs the State of Bihar

Nitish Kumar Paswan @ Mita Vs The State of Bihar

Shivji Yadav @ Ghurahu Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Asfaque Vs the State of Bihar