Madhusudan Bag v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30985 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2023 Thana- JHAJHA RAIL P.S. District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Madhusudan Bag S/O Sudhir Bag R/O B-B-14/71, Kalyani, P.S- Kalyani, Distt.- Nadia (W.B.).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Hardeep Dalal S/O Ravindra Dalal R/O 901 P2 Usha Tower Kundali, P.SKundali, Distt.- Sonipar (Haryana). ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bipin Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-05-2025 Heard Mr.Bipin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 09.12.2024 in connection with G.R.P./Jhajha P.S. Case No. 92 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 31.03.2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 395,412,417,420/120(B) of IPC.

3. According to prosecution case, the petitioner along with other accused persons have looted the trolley bags of the informant which was loaded with cash at Jhajha Railway Station. It is further alleged that co-accused person, namely, Tanik Verma @ Ramchandra Pd. Verma threatened the

2/4 informant and thereafter, they all fled away with the said bags.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 09.12.2024 and the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name was transpired during investigation. It appears that the informant has compromised the case with the co-accused persons including the petitioner and the informant, namely, Hardeep Dalal has received Rs. Forty Lacs through different demand drafts and now the matter has been compromised between the parties and apart from that, co-accused persons, namely, Prakash Singh @ Prakash Patel and Rasha Javed Kirmani @ Sara Madam have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by different Coordinate Benches of this Hon'ble Court vide orders dated 18.10.

2023 and 10.04.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos.64036 of 2023 and 83658 of 2023 respectively. Further submits that coaccused persons, namely, Chandan Kumar and others have been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 18.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.61934 of 2023 and its analogous cases and the police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 09.12.2024.

3/4

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one but he fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in both the cases, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.

6. Considering the aforesaid fact, let the petitioner, above named, 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 learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Kiul in connection with G.R.P./Jhajha P.S. Case No. 92 of 2023, with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

4/4 criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T