Chhotu Yadav @ Ashish Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17355 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2021 Thana- PASRAHA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Chhotu Yadav @ Ashish Ranjan Son of Surendra Yadav Resident of VillageChillada, P.S.- Saraiyahat, District- Dumka, Jharkhand. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 18567 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2021 Thana- PASRAHA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Jitan Kumar Pal Son of Bhawtaran Pal Resident of Village - Kharangi, P.S.- Muffasil, Distt.- Dumka (Jharkhand).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 19034 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2021 Thana- PASRAHA District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.

Raja Mandal @ Santosh Kumar Mandal Son of Kishor Mandal Resident of Village - Dumka Railway Station , Ward no.01, P.S.- Nagar, Distt.- Dumka (Jharkhand).

2.

Akash Kumar son of Surendra Ram Dangalpara Ward No 5 P S Sadar District Dumka Jharkhand 3.

Sanju Sah @ Saurav Sah @ Sanju Saw @ Saurav Saw Late Mantu Sah Harna Kundi Kali Mandir P S Muffasil District Dumka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 17355 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Ms. Preety Kunwar, Advocate

2/4 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, Advocate (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 18567 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 19034 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-09-2022 Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks of starting of Court proceeding in physical mode in normal course.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation in nut shell is that petitioners were intercepted by police found sitting in Tata Sumo Gold vehicle having no documents of the said vehicle.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners namely Chhotu Yadav @ Ashish Ranjan, Jitan Kumar Pal and Sanju Sah @ Saurav Sah @ Sanju Saw @ Saurav Saw have clean antecedents whereas as petitioner namely Raja Mandal @ Santosh Kumar Mandal carries five more cases other than the present one and petitioner namely Akash Kumar carries one more case other than the present one

3/4 and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that as per allegation in the F.I.R. that One Tata Sumo Gold was recovered from the possession of the petitioners and that was stolen property. He further submits that there is no compliance of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. and the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioners and the petitioners are in custody since 22.12.2021. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Pasraha P.S. Case No. 164 of 2021, with the following conditions :-

(1) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.

4/4

(2) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T