Bipin Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.8845 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -96 Year- 2015 Thana -HATHIDAH District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Bipin Mahto Son of Late Rajo Mahto Resident of village - Simariyaghat, Bindtoli, P.S. Barauni ( Chakiya ), District - Begusarai .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jainendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 22-04-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offence punishable under section 392 of the I.P.C Allegedly, four unknown miscreants after assaulting and abusing the informant snatched Mobile, Titen Wrist Watch, Purse containing the driving license and cash of Rs.400/-, Gold Tawij of Durgajee and further snatched Mobile and cash of Rs. 7,400/- from Lakshmi Kumar. During investigation the petitioner confessed his guilt and on his confession looted Tawij of Durgajee was recovered from the shop 'New Verma Jewellars'. Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner is in custody since 15.10.2015, he has not been put on

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8845 of 2016 (3) dt.22-04-2016 2/2 the test identification parade, nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, the confessional statement made before the police has got no evidentiary value in the eye of law and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration, to which the learned A.P.P. opposes.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering detention of the petitioner, now he is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Shree Deepak Kumar, J.M. 1st Class, Barh in Hathidah P.S. Case No. 96 of 2015, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T