Chandrika Bhuiya @ Panda v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17555 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2010 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== CHANDRIKA BHUIYA @ PANDA Son of Ramdev Bhuiya, Resident of Village - Amarut Barkipokhar, P.S.- Dobhi, Dist.- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rudal Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-02-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 395 & 397 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution story in short is that on 10-06-2010 one Daya Shankar gave his fardbeyan before S.H.O. Barachatti P.S. that he is driver of Bus No. BR 245-1675 which runs from Buxar to Ranchi. It is alleged that the informant along with conductor and passengers started the bus from Buxar to Ranchi and bus became in disorder in the jurisdiction of Barachatti P.S. and the wheel of the bus became punctured at 2.00 A.M. and they were

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17555 of 2020(2) dt.09-02-2021 2/3 removing the wheel and in the meantime, 7-8 persons armed with deadly weapons came there and surrounded the bus and looted the passengers.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Suraj Manjhi. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case. There is no recovery of any incriminating article from possession of the petitioner. He has not been put on test identification parade to ascertain his participation in the alleged offence.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the Complaint Case/F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17555 of 2020(2) dt.09-02-2021 3/3 like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sherghati, Gaya in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 115 of 2010 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Sudhir Singh, J) A.K.V.//- U T