Allowed¶21

Tuntun Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Feb 2024CR. MISC./9424/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail granted (conditional) — Patna High Court, CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9424 of 2024, decision 22-02-2024, single bench: Khatim Reza, J. Petitioner Tuntun Prasad vs The State of Bihar; FIR: Motihari Mufassil P.S. Case No. 687 of 2023 dt. 25.09.2023 (Ss. 401, 414, 467, 468, 471, 34 IPC). Release upon arrest/surrender within six weeks on bail bond Rs. 10,000/- plus two like sureties before CJM Motihari, East Champaran, subject to S. 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions. Advocates: Ajay Kumar Singh (petitioner); Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP (State).

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed: upon arrest/surrender within six weeks, release on bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each before the learned C.J.M. Motihari, East Champaran or Successor Court, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.

Tuntun Prasad Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9424 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-687 Year-2023 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Tuntun Prasad SON OF KISUNDEV PRASAD RESIDENT OF VILLAGEGODHWA, PS- MUFFASIL, DISTT- EAST CHAMPARAN

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 22-02-2024

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Motihari Muffasil P.S. Case No. 687 of 2023 dated 25.09.2023, instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 401, 414, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

The prosecution case, in short, is that the informant received information that in village Dhekaha, some villagers have apprehended two persons, who disclosed that they are moving to steal a motorcycle. Thereafter, the informant along with police personnel reached there, where he saw that villagers have apprehended two persons with one motorcycle bearing its Registration No. BR 05 E 2472 and on query, apprehended

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9424 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 2/3

¶16

persons disclosed their name as Vikash Kumar and Rahul Kumar and told that they were using the motorcycle by changing its registration number. The apprehended persons disclosed that they along with the petitioner and other coaccused have committed theft of several motorcycles and mobile.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been made accused in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused persons namely, Vikash Kumar and Rahul Kumar, who were apprehended at the spot. Learned counsel further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the house of the petitioner. It is further stated that during the course of investigation, no cogent evidence has been collected by the police against the petitioner. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

¶18

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶19

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the event of arrest / surrender of the petitioner within a period of

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9424 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 3/3

¶21

six weeks from today, in connection with Motihari Muffasil P.S. Case No. 687 of 2023, he shall be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M. Motihari, East Champaran or Successor Court, Motihari, East Champaran, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶22

(Khatim Reza, J)

¶23

sankalp/-

¶24

U T

Tuntun Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tuntun Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balistar Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Randhir Kumar @ Bhagat Vs The State of Bihar

Ganesh Singh @ Ganesh Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Gayanand Roy Vs the State of Bihar

Mintu Kumar Rajak @ Pintu Kumar Rajak Vs The State of Bihar

Surendra Singh @ Seth Vs The State of Bihar