Santosh Kumar @ Guddu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7830 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-387 Year-2023 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Santosh Kumar @ Guddu Son Of Late Prayag Singh Resident Of Village - Malti Ward No.06, P.S. - Ujiyarpur, District - Samastipur, Bihar - 848101 ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Piyush Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 20-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 468, 467, 471, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner along with others is of preparing to commit cheating in the Sepoy examination with advance gadgets.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. He submitted that the petitioner had no idea about the things happening on the unfateful day and he was in the coaching to attend the classes and he saw that the police had raided the place as a result of which commotion took place

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7830 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2024 2/2 and many persons from the coaching started running and escaped from the place of occurrence and when the police found no one to arrest, then she arrested the petitioner and showed the recovery of seized goods from the petitioner despite there being no independent witnesses. He further submitted that the seizure list was not prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. as the seizure list witnesses are the police personnels. He is languishing in judicial custody since 01.10.2023.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to 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 Court concerned in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 387 of 2023.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Arish/- U T