← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./17083/2023allowed

Ram Kishore Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2023-05-11Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 17083 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2022 Thana- KAMTAUL District- Darbhanga ====================================================== RAM KISHORE YADAV SON OF BHIKHARI YADAV R/O VILLAGECHANDI, P.S.- BAHADURPUR, DISTRICT- DARBHANGA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Baidya Nath Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Narsingh Tanti ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 11-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per prosecution case, the informant is posted in L&T Finance Company at Kamtaul and working as field staff. It is further alleged that when the informant was returning after collecting of Rs. 76,620/- from different centres thereafter, two unknown persons overtaken his motorcycle and snatched his bag containing Rs. 76,620/-, mobile, key of his motorcycle and fled away.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 17083 of 2023(2) dt.11-05-2023 2/2 committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and the same has been lodged against unknown person. The name of the petitioner has come into light, on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Md. Irfan, which has got no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. No incriminating/looted article has recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. No T.I. Parade has been done. He is languishing in judicial custody since 08.09.2022.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M.- 1st Class, Darbhanga in connection with Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 193 of 2022.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) arish/- U T