Allowed

Sahil Bharti @ Guddu v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC29 Jan 2024CR. MISC./33298/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application under Sections 341, 323, 354B, 354D, 504, 506/34 and 376 IPC arising from an alleged relationship with a married informant. Considering the facts and period of custody, the court enlarged the petitioner on bail on a bond with two sureties and conditions regarding trial cooperation and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount to CJM, Darbhanga, with trial-cooperation and no-tampering conditions.

Sahil Bharti @ Guddu Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33298 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2015 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Darbhanga

¶3

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

¶4

Sahil Bharti @ Guddu, Son Of Sadanand Paswan Resident Of VillageRadhepura, Ps- Bahadurpur, Distt- Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivnandan Bharti For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER

¶10

7 29-01-2024

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 354B, 354D, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and later on Section 376 of the IPC.

¶14

As per prosecution case, the informant was married with Md. Murtuza four years ago and before marriage the informant had friendship with the petitioner and he used to visit at the sasural of the informant resulting that her matrimonial life broken and she started living with her father in Maike . The informant further alleged that on 20.03.2015 at about 10 PM the petitioner entered into her house and outraged the modesty and on the false pretext of marriage established physical relationship

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33298 of 2023(7) dt.29-01-2024 2/3

¶16

with her.

¶17

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. He submitted that after lodging the FIR, the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 28.07.2015 passed in A.B.P. No. 1166/2015 by the Session Judge, Darbhanga. Thereafter the informant moved before the Hon’ble High Court by filing Cr. Misc. No. 50054 of 2015 for cancellation of bail, which was dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court. He further submitted that the informant filed a miscellaneous application before the District Judge, Darbhanga bearing Cr. Misc. No. 122/2018 for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner and ultimately Cr. Misc. No. 122 of 2018 was allowed by 3^rd Additional Session Judge, Darbhanga on 16.12.2019 and bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled. Victim is a major lady and there seems to be consensual relationship between both the parties. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition. He is languishing in judicial custody since 09.02.2023.

¶18

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State, learned counsel for the informant and submitted that this petitioner established physical relationship with the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33298 of 2023(7) dt.29-01-2024 3/3

¶20

victim.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering 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 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in connection with Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 81 of 2015 with a conditions:-

¶22

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

¶23

(ii) Petitioner shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶24

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶25

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

¶26

Arish/- U

Sahil Bharti @ Guddu v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahil Bharti @ Guddu 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

Wajid Ali Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Brijlal Pave Vs the State of Bihar

Pintu Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh Kumar Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Nitu Devi Vs The State of Bihar