Ranjeet Chaudhary @ Ranjeet @ Ranjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29734 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1094 Year-2019 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna ====================================================== RANJEET CHAUDHARY @ RANJEET @ RANJEET KUMAR, aged about 25 years, Male, Son of Raj Kumar Mahto, Resident of Uteri Sangat, Police Station-Phulwarisharif, District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate.
For the State :
Mr. Mustaque Alam, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Ashhar Mustafa, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-01-2021 Learned senior counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.
Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offence registered under Sections 363 and 365 of the I.P.C. Later on, Sections 302, 201, 147 and 149 of the I.P.C. were also added. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 21.11.2019 the son of the informant, namely, Amir Hazla, went to attend the procession near the Tamtam Parao, Phulwari Shariff, but he did
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29734 of 2020(3) dt.11-01-2021 2/3 not return at his home till 11.00 P.M. in the night. It has been submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 21.01.2020. Charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner has come in the present case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest that the petitioner had participated in abduction of the victim. Later on, the dead body of the victim was recovered by the side of the Bridge. The dead body is said to have been recovered on the basis of confessional statement of other co-accused. The same is not alleged against the petitioner.
On behalf of the learned counsels for the State and informant, it has been submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29734 of 2020(3) dt.11-01-2021 3/3 satisfaction of the learned Sub Judge-IX, Patna in connection with Phulwarisharif P.S. Case No. 1094/2019.
(Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T