Patna High CourtCR. REV./362/2014bail granted

Raj Kumar @ Bittu v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2015-01-19Mr. Justice Samarendra Pratap Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.362 of 2014 ====================================================== Raj Kumar @ Bittu, son of Ram Darshan Mahto, resident of Village- Dudha Mathiya, P.S. Majhaulia, District- West Champaran, under guardianship of her mother Gyanwati Devi, wife of Ram Darshan Mahto, resident of Village- Dudha Mathiya, P.S. Majhaulia, District- West Champaran at Bettiah.

.... .... Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Sugandhi Devi, wife of Sita Ram Mahto, resident of Village- Dudha Mathiya Nonia Tola, P.S. Majhaulia, District- West Champaran. .... .... Opposite Parties.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Jitendra Kr. Roy 1 (App) ======================================================

CORAM:

HONOURABLE MR.

JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-01-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

The petitioner, who is a juvenile, has prayed for bail in a case registered under Sections 302, 201, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code in Majhaulia P.S. Case No. 116 of 2013. Allegation is that the petitioner induced Parmeshwar Kumar, the son of the informant, to proceed for Sariswa Bazar and thereafter the informant's son did not return and was found dead. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the case is at the most one of the last seen. He further submits that other accused persons, who have also been implicated in this case, have already been granted bail.

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.362 of 2014 (4) dt.19-01-2015 2 / 2 Counsel for the informant/opposite party no.2 submits that the accused persons have strong motive to commit the occurrence, as some love letters as alleged to be written to the deceased by one of the girls of accused family was recovereds. I find that both the Courts below have rejected the prayer for bail that his release is likely to bring the petitioner in association with known criminals. The petitioner is in custody since 11.04.2013.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that Intermediate examination of the petitioner in all likelihood is to commence from 17.02.2015.

In these facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, West Champaran at Bettiah in connection with Majhaulia P.S. case no. 116 of 2013 (J.J.B. Tr. No. 384 of 2013) with the condition that the petitioner would appear before the Juvenile Justice Board, West Champaran at Bettiah along with one of his parents at least twice in a month till the trial is over.

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.) Uday/- U