Rupesh Kumar @ Mini Naresh @ Mini Down v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38704 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-210 Year-2019 Thana- SURYAGARHA District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== RUPESH KUMAR @ MINI NARESH @ MINI DOWN Son of Dayanand Mahto Resident of Village- Khawa Chandratola, P.S.- Mednichauki, DistrictLakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 04-08-2021 Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, learned counsel appearing for the State through video conferencing. Petitioner renews his prayer for bail inasmuch as earlier regular bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 15.6.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1370 of 2020 granting liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after one year if the trial does not show any progress. Petitioner was made accused in connection with Suryagarha P.S. Case No. 210 of 2019 registered under Section 395 / 397 of the I.P.C.

The allegation as per the First Information Report is that petitioner along with others pretended to be customers entered into the jewellery shop of the informant and looted away jewellery, mobile etc. and when the informant resisted, the accused persons shot him by fire arm due to which the informant received injury on his right leg.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38704 of 2021(2) dt.04-08-2021 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he is not named in the First Information Report, no test identification parade was conducted by the Police and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that in paragraph no. 11 of the bail application the petitioner has categorically stated that the case has only been committed in the year 2020 but no witness has been examined on behalf of the prosecution as yet and the trial has not shown any progress. The petitioner is in custody since 26.7.2019 i.e. for more than two years.

Regard being had to the submissions made by the parties, taking into consideration the materials available on record, the fact that petitioner is in custody since 26.7.2019, the trial has not shown any progress due to COVID 19 Pandemic and this is second attempt for bail on behalf of the petitioner, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, let the petitioner, above named, be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District Judge, Lakhisarai in connection with ST No.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38704 of 2021(2) dt.04-08-2021 3/3 P.S. Case No. 210 of 2019.

It is made clear that at the time of furnishing bail bond all the parties shall follow the guidelines regarding social distancing.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T