Single judge allowed the petitioner's bail application in a serious criminal case involving IPC offences (307, 326, 302) and Arms Act charges. Bail granted subject to a bond and specific conditions regarding court presence and conduct.
Petitioner directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21225 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2023 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa
====================================================== Prince Kumar Son Of Bishwanath Yadav Resident Of Fatehpur, P.S. - Sonbarsa Raj, District - Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rashmi Jha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, A.P.P. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
5 09-07-2024
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State .
The petitioner has filed the instant application
for grant of regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 326, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 35 of the Arms Act and subsequently, Section 302 of Indian Penal Code was added.
Prosecution case in nutshell is that two unknown miscreants opened fire upon the informant’s
son, namely, Sanoj Yadav, due to which he sustained
gun shot injury and later succumbed to injuries. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21225 of 2024(5) dt.09-07-2024 2/4
occurrence was captured in the CCTV camera.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. His name sprang up on the basis
of his self confessional statement as well confessional statement of co-accused persons. There is no consistent evidence against the petitioner. During investigation, petitioner and co-accused Raghu has been identified in the CCTV footage. From the confessional statement of co-accuse Raghu, this fact came in light that co-accused Raghu has fired upon the deceased. It is further submitted that confessional statement and identification on the basis of CCTV footage have no evidentiary value. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 17th of February, 2023.
Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for Bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21225 of 2024(5) dt.09-07-2024 3/4
and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody,
this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 53 of 2023 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District
Judge I, Saharsa, subject to the following conditions:-
threatens the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
similar nature, as alleged in the present case, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21225 of 2024(5) dt.09-07-2024 4/4
prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of
bail.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
Nirajkrs/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail given the gravity of the charges and his custody period.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Prince Kumar
The State of Bihar
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
