Mayank Kumar Mishra v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25855 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Mayank Kumar Mishra S/o Dinanath Mishra R/o Village- Bhaluahi Kharkhura, P.S.- Delha in the District of Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate :
Mr. Aditya Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 18-04-2025 Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 229 of 2024 for the offence punishable under sections 329 of the Indian Penal Code, lodged on 15.06.2024 by the informant, Asharfi Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the accused person booked Tata Indigo for a fare of Rs.3,000/-. Under bonafide belief he started journey along with them from Patna to Gaya. In between, fuel worth Rs.1,200/- was also filled but after mid-night, he was taken out, tied to a tree with hands, feet and mouth choked with clothes. He was also
2/4 beaten before they took away the vehicle. It was only after an elderly man came that he got free and thereafter the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already suffered by being in custody since 24.07.2024 (paragraph no.4 of the petition) if granted bail, he shall be diligently appearing in trial and failure to do so even for a day, his bail bond may be canceled. Further, he shall not indulge in any criminal activity and appearing before the concerned Police Station every fortnight for next one year. Further, without accepting the allegation or the outcome of the present case, the petitioner wants to contribute Rs.10,000/- to the informant Asharfi Kumar by Demand Draft issued by the local State Bank of India Branch submitted before the Trial Court.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail submitting that his role has come and he has also criminal antecedent.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, though the petitioner has criminal antecedent, in that background, his bail application was rejected earlier, he has remained in custody since 24.07.2024 and an undertaking has been given that he shall be diligently appearing in trial and appearing before the concerned Police Station every fortnight failing which the State shall be free to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds, in
3/4 that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of bail subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- by Demand Draft in the informant's name (Asharfi Kumar) issued by the local State Bank of India branch to submitted before the Trial Court and after checking credentials to be handed over to the informant.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-XIII, Gaya, in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 229 of 2024, subject to the following conditions: (i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for next one year to mark his attendance;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
4/4 promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T