Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37790/2024bail granted

Raju Ranjan @ Raju Ranjan Manjhi @ Raju Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-05-16Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37790 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2024 Thana- CHAPRA MUFFASIL District- Saran ====================================================== Raju Ranjan @ Raju Ranjan Manjhi @ Raju Ranjan Kumar S/O Sita Ram Manjhi R/O Village- Dhenuki, P.S.- Marhaurah, Dist- Saran At Chhapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 16-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 141 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, 1525 liters spirit was recovered from pick-up vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. It is further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37790 of 2024(2) dt.16-05-2024 2/3 submitted that the petitioner is neither owner nor driver of the vehicle in question. The petitioner was not arrested on spot. Name of the petitioner has transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused persons namely Shiv Shankar Pandey and Rajendra Singh which has no evidentiary value. The petitioner is in custody since 02.05.2024 and has got six criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that similarly situated co-accused has been granted bail by a this Court vide order dated 14.05.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 36626 of 2024. There is no compliance of Section 100 of Cr.P.C.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Let the petitioner be released on bail after framing of charge, if not already framed on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 141 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37790 of 2024(2) dt.16-05-2024 3/3 (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T