Allowed

Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Ram v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Oct 2024CR. MISC./74127/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the petitioner, a watchman accused of theft, subject to conditions. The petitioner had already paid Rs. 25,000 as compensation. Bail was allowed with a bond and obligations including regular police station visits and ensuring no contact with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with Rs. 10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions including fortnightly police attendance and no tampering with witnesses.

Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Ram Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74127 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2024 Thana- RAHUI District- Nalanda

¶3

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

¶4

Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Ram Son of Late Suraj Ram village- Sarmera, PsSarmera, Dist- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s

¶7

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

¶8

Appearance :

¶9

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binod Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 22-10-2024

¶12

Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶13

The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Rahui P.S. Case No. 48 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 30.01.2024 by the informant, Ankul Srivastava.

¶14

As per the prosecution story, the informant who is Junior Electrical Engineer of Electricity Department, Rahui, Nalanda alleged about stolen cable. Upon verification, it was found that 13, 12 , 12 and 10 spans of AB cable from the 25 KVA transformer were removed causing loss of 2,45,000/-. Accordingly, the FIR.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he being the ‘Chowkidar’ of the said campus from where the recovery has been made, implicated. Further, in all the cases being the ‘Chowkidar’, the implication has come which is

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74127 of 2024(2) dt.22-10-2024 2/3

¶17

reflected in para-3 of the petition. He has already suffered by being in custody since 09.05.2024 (para-17 of the petition). Last submission is that irrespective of the outcome of the present case and/or accepting the allegation, the petitioner would like to make payment of Rs.25,000/-through Demand Draft issued by the local branch of the State Bank of India addressed to the Executive Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Section, Rahui, Nalanda.

¶18

Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that he being the ‘Chowkidar’, cannot exonerate from the responsibility, allegation.

¶19

There is force in the submission of the learned APP and the petitioner being the ‘Chowkidar’, it was his duty to ascertain the material that is coming in the campus. However, the FIR has been lodged, he will be facing the trial and is in custody since 09.05.2024 and has further undertaken to pay Rs. 25,000/- through Demand Draft issued by the local branch of the State Bank of India addressed to the Executive Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Section, Rahui, Nalanda, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of bail with conditions.

¶20

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74127 of 2024(2) dt.22-10-2024 3/3

¶22

like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-2, Nalanda, in connection with Rahui P.S. Case No. 48 of 2024 subject to the following conditions:

¶23

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his bona fide;

¶24

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

¶25

(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for next six months to mark his attendance;

¶26

(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

¶27

(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

¶28

Ravi/- U T

Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Ram 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

Karan Rikhyasan @ Chotu @ Chotu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Biru Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Halim Vs The State of Bihar

Suraj Kumar Yadav @ Suraj Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Basudeo Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar