Patna High CourtCR. MISC./25744/2017bail granted

Rajan Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2017-06-14Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25744 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -14 Year- 2016 Thana -LUTUA District- GAYA ====================================================== Rajan Chaudhary Son of Bablu Chaudhary, Resident of VillageShaktisthan, P.S.- Chankand, District- Gaya, ... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. B.N. Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 2.

14-06-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Lutua P.S. Case No. 14 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380, 411/120 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case the name of petitioner has been disclosed by the accused Dewa Chaudhary who was caught by the villagers. Learned counsel further submits that when the police apprehended this petitioner along with coaccused Rahul Chaudhary, a separate case being Lutua P.S. Case No. 15 of 2016 has been registered under Section 411 and 120 IPC read with Section 25(1-b) 26 and 35 of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25744 of 2017 (2) dt.14-06-2017 Arms Act. Learned counsel virtually submits that two separate cases have been registered out of the same alleged occurrence.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in Lutua P.S. Case No. 15/2016 he has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 15184/2017 vide order dated 08.05.2017. Petitioner is in custody with effect from 07.02.2017. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor accepts the position that two separate cases were registered. Considering the allegation and the fact that in another case petitioner has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, in connection with Lutua P.S. Case No. 14 of 2016.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) Rajeev/- U T