Chintu Kumar @ Chintu Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15077 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-347 Year-2021 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== CHINTU KUMAR @ CHINTU RAM, Son of Kamal Prasad Resident of Village - Bela Bira (Tilkail) P.S. Makhdumpur, District - Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Paras Nath For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-07-2022 Heard Mr. Paras Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jehanabad Town P.S. Case No. 347 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the I.P.C. As per allegation, when the informant proceeded to deliver ornaments to his customers, who were sitting in the market, petitioner along with his associate came there and looted the ornaments contained in plastic bag and also snatched away a golden chain from one of his customers and also assaulted the informant on his head by the pistol. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
2/4 the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner has been arrested only on suspicion. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and he has not been put on TIP as yet. He has been arrested only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, Ravi Kumar. He has further submitted that the co-accused, Ravi Kumar has already been granted bail by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.12.2021, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 48011 of 2021.
The petitioner is in custody since 03.02.2022. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the petition that the petitioner has not moved earlier before this Court for grant of anticipatory bail or regular bail. It has further been stated that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
However, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on
3/4 bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Jehanabad, in connection with Jehanabad Town P.S. Case No. 347 of 2021 on the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner will make himself available for interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required. (ii) The petitioner will undertake that investigation/trial will not hamper on account of his absence or non-cooperation. He must be available to the police or the court whenever his presence is required.
(iii) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.
(iv) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedent, the learned court below shall cancel the bail bond of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied that the
4/4 petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent despite his knowledge of the same.
(v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, the learned court below shall cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.
The application stands allowed accordingly.
The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within a period of one month and the Registry is directed to issue the certified copy of this order only after removal of office objections.
(Jitendra Kumar, J) uttam/- U T