Allowed

Ajit Kumar @ Lola v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Dec 2024CR. MISC./44171/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application under Sections 392 and 365 IPC arising from an abduction and robbery case. Petitioner unnamed in FIR, implicated via co-accused's confession, articles recovered but never put to TIP, custody exceeding four years. Bail granted with conditions including trial co-operation and antecedent verification.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount, subject to conditions of trial co-operation and no tampering with evidence.

Ajit Kumar @ Lola Vs the State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44171 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2020 Thana- MOKAMAH District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Ajit Kumar @ Lola Son of Late Rajesh Mahto Resident of Village - Dhourani Tola, Police Station - Mokama, District - Patna

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 13-12-2024

¶13

Heard Mr. Aryan Singh, learned counsel for the

¶14

petitioner and Mr. Madan Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 15.10.2020 in connection with Mokama P.S. Case No. 129 of 2020, F.I.R. dated 30.06.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 392 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

According to prosecution case, four miscreants on two bikes intercepted the informant and his friend and on the point of pistol they abducted the informant’s friend namely, Indrajit Kumar and also took the belongings of the informant.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44171 of 2024(3) dt.13-12-2024 2/3

¶19

in the F.I.R. and the name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Sumit Kumar. He further submits that some articles of Indrajit Kumar (victim) was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He further submits that although some articles have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner but till date the said articles were not put on TIP. The petitioner is in custody since 15.10.2020 i.e. more than 4 years.

¶20

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the belonging of the informant has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and apart from that the petitioner carries 12 criminal antecedents other than the present one.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, nature of allegation as well as period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, 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 learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Barh in connection with Mokama P.S. Case No. 129 of 2020, subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44171 of 2024(3) dt.13-12-2024 3/3

¶23

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

ii. 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

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶26

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶27

Vanisha/-

¶28

U T

Ajit Kumar @ Lola v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Kumar @ Lola 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

Dilip sahni Vs The State of Bihar

Sumit Bhagat @ Sumit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dinesh Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Mintu Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Manoranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Hari Ram @ Harish Vs The State of Bihar