Raushan Kumar @ Bauna @ Bayana v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13210 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2019 Thana- KURTHA District- Jehanabad ====================================================== RAUSHAN KUMAR @ BAUNA @ BAYANA Son of Siddheshwar Yadav @ Sudeshwar Singh Resident of Village- Lodipur, P.S. and District- Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Paras Nath, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 18-07-2022 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 Kurtha P.S. Case No. 114 of 2019 registered for the offence under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accused/petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 01.10.2021.

The allegation against the petitioner is to commit theft and while committing so, taken away pick-up van of the informant, alongwith other co-accused persons. 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.13210 of 2022(2) dt.18-07-2022 2/3 confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Rohit Kumar. It is submitted that nothing incriminating material recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, which may connect the petitioner with the present set of occurrence. It is submitted that petitioner has not been put on T.I.P. It is pointed out that petitioner is involved in three other criminal cases, in which he is on bail. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that investigation in this case is complete for which chargesheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, while opposing the prayer of bail, fairly conceded that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.

Considering the facts and circumstances as mentioned above, as there is no recovery of stolen article from the conscious possession of the petitioner coupled with the fact that chargesheet has already been submitted, let the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Kurtha P.S. Case No. 114 of 2019 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arwal, subject to the following conditions:

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13210 of 2022(2) dt.18-07-2022 3/3 "(i) That accused/petitioner shall not involve in the similar nature of offence till the conclusion of trial, failing which the State shall be at liberty to move before the Trial Court itself for the cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner.

(ii) 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.

(iii) That one of the bailors shall be Sharda Devi, who is the mother of the petitioner and deponent of the present bail petition."

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