Laljee Pasi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14954 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2017 Thana- SHIVSAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Laljee Pasi Son Of Lalan Pasi R/O Village- Rangpur, P.S.- Darigaon, DistrictRohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chhotelal Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Harendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 14-07-2021 Heard the counsel for the parties through virtual court proceedings.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceeding. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench. Earlier vide order dated 20.01.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 79223 of 2019, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court with a liberty to renew his prayer for bail once the charge is framed in this case.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Shivsagar (Baddi) P.S. Case No. 17 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 435, 385, 586 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13, 17, 20 of U.P.A. Act.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. No such occurrence as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14954 of 2021(2) dt.14-07-2021 2/2 alleged ever took place and the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. He submits that save and except the confessional statement of the coaccused, there is absolutely nothing against the petitioner. He submits that other co-accused persons have been granted bail by different Co-ordinate Benches of this Court. He further submits that the charge against the petitioner has been framed on 07.04.2021. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has been languishing in custody since 13.03.2019.

Learned APP for the State opposed the bail petition. Considering the facts aforesaid, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending in connection with Shivsagar (Baddi) P.S. Case No. 17 of 2017.

Learned court below is directed to verify the fact whether the charge has been framed against the petitioner as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner. If the charge has not been framed then the petitioner would not be released on bail.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) GAURAV S./- U T