Sudhanshu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.32832 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -140 Year- 2017 Thana -MUZAFFARPUR TOWN DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ======================================================
1. Sudhanshu Kumar Son of Hari Shankar Mishra Resident of Village - Besari, P.S. Hathauri, District Muzaffarpur.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 20-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Petitioner, in the present case, is seeking regular bail in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 140 of 2017, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 420, 414, and 401/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-b)A/26/35 of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the First Information Report it is alleged that this petitioner along-with other two co-accused was apprehended by police in suspicious condition. One Honda Sine motorcycle bearing registration no. BR-06-AT-1095 and one white colour scooty and total six mobiles
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32832 of 2017 (2) dt.20-07-2017 2/3 were recovered from their possession. Learned counsel further submits that as per the First Information Report the motorcycle recovered from the possession of the apprehended accused virtually belongs to one Mani Bhushan Kumar, who had lodged a case, Hathauri P.S. Case No. 13 of 2017, under Sections 356 & 379 IPC. To distinguish his case learned counsel submits that as per the second seizure list, from possession of the co-accused Arvind Kumar, the said motorcycle has been shown to have been seized and in the said motorcycle one country made pistol and one live cartridge were concealed. At the instance of Said Arvind Kumar, further recovery was made as per the said seizure list.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the aforesaid view of the matter, considering the fact that prior to the present case there was no other case against this petitioner, although the petitioner has been implicated in Hathauri P.S. Case No. 13 of 2017, petitioner may be granted privilege of regular bail subject to such terms and conditions which may be imposed by this court. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances and some distinguishing features of this case, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32832 of 2017 (2) dt.20-07-2017 3/3 on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 140 of 2017, subject to the conditions, under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C., and that one of the bailors would be a close family member having no criminal antecedent and the petitioner shall co-operate in trial, and two regular default in putting appearance before the trial court shall lead to cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) siddharth/- U T