Indrajeet Kumar Rai @ Indrajeet Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6014 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2021 Thana- MAHINDWARA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== INDRAJEET KUMAR RAI @ INDRAJEET RAI S/O SURESH RAI R/o village- Batrouli, P.S.- Mahindwra, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 21-07-2022 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mahindwara P.S. Case No. 80 of 2021 registered for the offence under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accused/petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 21.08.2021.

The allegation against the petitioner is to committing robbery and while committing so, taken away the vehicle, mobile and other valuable documents of the informant. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that name of the petitioner surfaced on the basis of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6014 of 2022(4) dt.21-07-2022 2/3 confessional statement of co-accused and also on self confession, where there is no incriminating material or anything surfaced during course of investigation, which may suggest the involvement of the petitioner with the present occurrence. It has further been submitted that petitioner was never put on TIP. It has further been submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent. While concluding the argument, it has been submitted that investigation of this case has been completed, for which, charge-sheet has already been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

Learned APP, while opposing the prayer of bail, fairly conceded the fact that petitioner is not named in the FIR. Considering the facts and circumstances as mentioned above, as nothing incriminating surfaced during course of investigation, which may connect the petitioner prima-facie with the present set of occurrence coupled with the fact as charge-sheet has already been submitted in this case, let the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Mahindwara P.S. Case No. 80 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Sitamarhi/concerned court, subject to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6014 of 2022(4) dt.21-07-2022 3/3 following conditions:

"(i)Accused/Petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be physically present on each and every date before the Trial Court till conclusion of the trial and exemption from physical appearance be allowed by the Trial Court, only on medical ground of the petitioner duly supported by the documents.

(ii) That one of the bailors shall be Priyanka Kumari, who is the wife of the petitioner and deponent of the present bail petition."

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) S.Katyayan/- U T