Jitendra Thakur @ Jhunjhun Thakur v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17828 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-552 Year-2019 Thana- KANTI THARMAL POWER DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.
Jitendra Thakur @ Jhunjhun Thakur Son of Shatrudhan Thakur Resident of Village - Kushi Harpur Rammi, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur 2.
Bittu Thakur Son of Late Yadubansh Thakur Resident of Village - Kushi Harpur Rammi, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Neeraj Kumar alias Sanidh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 15-12-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State through video conferencing. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Kanti P.S. Case No.552 of 2019, registered under sections 397 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per allegation in the F.I.R., seven unknown accused persons are stated to have entered the office of the DTDC Company and under threat of pistol it is stated that they took away Rs.26 lacs.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the F.I.R. was registered against unknown and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17828 of 2020(3) dt.15-12-2020 2/3 the name of the petitioners transpired in course of investigation in the confessional statement of co-accused Chintu Kumar made before the police. It is submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered either from the possession of the petitioners or as a result of the said confessional statement of co-accused Chintu Kumar. It is further submitted that the cause of false implication of the petitioners is their being accused in other cases from before.
The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
Case diary called for in the case, has been received. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the material that has transpired in course of investigation especially the fact that there appears to be no recovery of any incriminating article as a result of the confessional statement of Chintu Kumar, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of eight weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender in connection with Kanti P.S. Case No.552 of 2019, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs 10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17828 of 2020(3) dt.15-12-2020 3/3 satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, (West), Muzaffarpur, subject to the conditions as laid down in section 438(2) of Criminal Procedure Code.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash/- U T