Surajmani Kumar @ Suryamani Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.51149 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -146 Year- 2016 Thana -BIBHUTIPUR District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================
1. Surajmani @ Suryamani Kumar son of Kusheshwar Ray, Resident of Village- Belsandi, P.S.- Bibhutipur, District- Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar Priyadarshi, Advocate Mr. Gajendra kumar Singh, AdvocateSingh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pancha Nand Pandit, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 23-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 21.06.2016 in connection with Bibhutipur P.S.Case No. 146 of 2016 for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case as lodged by the informant is that while he was going to Dalsingsarai from Rosera along with Ajay Kumar on motorcycle and at Dahu chouk, six miscreants on two motorcycle came there and dashed the motorcycle of the informant and took away Rs. 2,25,000/- and clothes also. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case, has no criminal history and there is no recovery of
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51149 of 2016 (3) dt.23-12-2016 2/2 any looted articles from the possession of the petitioner on being apprehended. He further submits that no T.I.P. has been done and on similar allegation an other co-accused has since been granted the privilege of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 37268 of 2016 on 27.10.2016. He submits that other co-accused have since been granted the privilege of bail by the learned Court below in B.P. 555 of 2016.
However, learned A.P.P. for the State submits that the petitioner is named in the First Information Report, hence, opposes the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances and other coaccused of similar allegation has since been granted the privilege of bail, let the petitioner, above named, 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 Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rosera in connection of Bibhutipur P.S.Case No. 146 of 2016.
(Nilu Agrawal, J) Sudha/- U T