Aman Ojha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46316 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-656 Year-2019 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Aman Ojha Son of Umesh Ojha Resident of Village- Madhukar Chapra, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 08-08-2022 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kanti P.S. Case No. 656 of 2019 registered for the offence under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The accused/petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 25.04.2020.

The allegation against the petitioner is to commit robbery and while committing so, taken away cash of Rs.1,30,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Thousand), alongwith

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46316 of 2021(3) dt.08-08-2022 2/3 other valuable documents from the informant.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that name of the petitioner surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Sundaram Kumar and in furtherance of the said confessional statement, nothing incriminating surfaced/recovered, which may connect the petitioner with the alleged set of occurrence. It is also submitted that petitioner has never been put on T.I.P. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that investigation in this case is complete for which chargesheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, while opposing the prayer of bail, fairly conceded that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.

Considering the facts and circumstances as mentioned above, as nothing surfaced during the course of investigation, in furtherance of the confessional statement of co-accused, which may connect the petitioner, prima facie, with the present set of robbery coupled with the fact that chargesheet has already been submitted, let the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Kanti P.S. Case No. 656 of 2019 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46316 of 2021(3) dt.08-08-2022 3/3 Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (West), Muzaffarpur/concerned Court, subject to the conditions as laid down u/s 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Ankit/- U T