Arjun Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20160 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2021 Thana- RIVILGANJ District- Saran ====================================================== ARJUN KUMAR SHARMA S/o Brij Bihari Sharma R/o Village- Bara Karinga, P.S.- Chapra Muffasil, District- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anant Kumar Bhaskar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-06-2022 Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Rivilganj P.S. Case No. 332 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the I.P.C.

As per prosecution case, on 06.09.2021 the informant and his son were going home from their shop and in the way four persons who were hidden their face came and overtook the motorcycle of the informant and stopped them and on the point of Katta snatched 25 pair payal, 5 pair Bera, 7 pair Mangalsutra, 10 pair Jitiya and other ornaments including one mobile and fled away from there. FIR has been registered

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20160 of 2022(2) dt.08-06-2022 2/3 against four unknown persons and the name of the petitioner has been surfaced on the confessional statement of co-accused Rohit Singh.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 06.12.2021 and bears no criminal antecedent. He further submits that charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering the evidence. He also submits that trial is going on and in the impugned order itself it has come that two witnesses have been examined before the trial court who failed to identify the petitioner. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner.

The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Saran at Chapra in connection with Rivilganj P.S. Case No. 332 of 2021, subject to following conditions:-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20160 of 2022(2) dt.08-06-2022 3/3 (i) One of the bailor shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who sworn the affidavit in bail application.

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) shahzad/- U T