Sahdeo Pandit v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22620 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2001 Thana- RUPAULI District- Purnia ====================================================== Sahdeo Pandit, aged about 64 years, Male, Son of Late Chaturi Pandit, Resident of Village- Bankattha, P.S.- Rupauli, Distt- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.A.G.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Rupauli (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 67 of 2001 (G.R. No.- 1497 of 2001) registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case as alleged in the F.I.R., in brief, is that one Chanu Devi, wife of Kanti Lal Pandit gave her written report before the I/C OP (Mohanpur) Rupauli alleging therein that on 18.08.2001 at about 8/9 P.M., while she was sleeping with her husband in her courtyard, 10-12 unknown persons duly armed came to the Aangan and taken away her husband. Out of them, four accused persons stayed in the Aangan and when the other accused persons walked away
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22620 of 2020(7) dt.04-03-2021 2/3 distantly, the four persons left the Aangan after giving threatening to the informant not to Benipatti, Madhubani disclose anything. The informant raised halla, thereupon the villagers came there and made search for her husband but could not locate him. The informant further stated that 10-12 days ago some of the villagers had given threatening that they will kidnap her husband and kill. She further alleged that the reason behind the kidnapping is that there is a case pending against Sahdeo Pandit and Basudeo Pandit in Purnea Court and they were pressuring her husband to compromise the matter but my husband always refused for the same and due to which all the accused persons committed this offence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that after investigation, police has submitted the final form against the petitioner. Against the order taking cognizance, the petitioner and his brother preferred Cr. Revision No.81 of 2002 before the court of learned Sessions Judge, Purnea. Later on, the said Cr. Revision application is dismissed in the year 2009. The petitioner has also retired in the year 2016 and he has bed ridden. By supplementary affidavit, he has enclosed the prescription of the doctor.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22620 of 2020(7) dt.04-03-2021 3/3 Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of CJM, Purnea in connection with Ruapuli (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 67 of 2001 (G.R. No.-1497 of 2001), subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Nasimul/- U T