Md. Gufran Andors. v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14596 of 2015 (3) dt.29-07-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.14596 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -268 Year- 2014 Thana -KOCHADHAMAN District- KISANGANJ ======================================================
1. Md. Gufran Son of Salauddin resident of Rashidpur Altabari, Police Station- Bahadurganj, District- Kishanganj.
2. Wasim@Wasimuddin Son of Late Azimuddin resident of Darnia Police Station- Bahadurganj, District- Kishanganj.
3. Punam Chand Das Son of Mohan Prasad Das resident of Rashidpur Altabari, Police Station- Bahadurganj, District- Kishanganj. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.14108 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -268 Year- 2014 Thana -KOCHADHAMAN District- KISANGANJ ======================================================
1. Abdul Haque Son of Ataur Rahman Resident of village- Darjee Basti, Khagra, P.S.- Kishanganj, District- Kishanganj .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.14596 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md.Ashlam Ansari (App) (In Cr.Misc. No.14108 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radha Mohan Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. P.N.Pandit(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE DHARNIDHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 29-07-2015 Heard.
The petitioners are not named in the FIR of Kochadhaman P.S.Case No.268 of 2014 under Section 302 etc Indian Penal Code and it appears that the materials have been used
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14596 of 2015 (3) dt.29-07-2015 against them were their own individual confessional statements before the police. Resisting the prayer, the learned counsel for the informant pointed out that some cellular phone numbers used while taking away the deceased, were allegedly belonging to the petitioners. But on my definite query regarding how the numbers were connected to the petitioners it was candidly admitted that there was no convincing material.
Considering the fact that the petitioners are not named in the FIR and they have been implicated on the own confessions, let the above named petitioners in the two petitions be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of CJM,, Kishanganj in connection with the above noted case. (Dharnidhar Jha, J) B.Kr./- U T