Sujit Sah v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49491 of 2014 (2) dt.03-03-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.49491 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -310 Year- 2014 Thana -SONEPUR District- SARAN ====================================================== SUJIT SAH, S/O PRAYAG SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - PERMANANDPUR P.S-SONEPUR DISTRICT-SARAN .... .... PETITIONER/S
VERSUS
THE STATE OF BIHAR .... .... OPPOSITE PARTY/S ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kr. Roy(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner is accused in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 310 of 2014 registered under Sections 457, 380 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of the written report of the informant, Nisha Kumari, Sonepur P.S. Case No. 310 of 2014 was instituted under Sections 457, 380 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code against unknown, who claimed to identify the culprits on seeing them again. In course of investigation, petitioner and one Satendra Kumar Sah were apprehended and they put on T.I. Parade on 22.11.2014 but informant only identified co-accused, Satendra Kumar Sah not this
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49491 of 2014 (2) dt.03-03-2015 petitioner as a culprit. It is further submitted that material as collected against the petitioner is that his mobile was used near the place of occurrence except that there is nothing against the petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 28.07.2014. Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Chapra, in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 310 of 2014. Out of two sureties one surety must be the parents or close relative of the petitioner. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T