← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./38207/2019bail granted

Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2019-09-04Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38207 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2019 Thana- SARE District- Nalanda ====================================================== Rahul Kumar Son of Manohar Prasad Resident of Village - Naurojpur, P.S.- Sare, Dist.- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Zainul Abedin, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 04-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner who is in custody since 30.04.2019 has filed the instant application for grant of bail in connection with Sare P.S. Case No. 35 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under sections 406,420,182 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the allegation in the FIR, it is alleged that the petitioner and one another who carry out the delivery of the Flip Cart Company, lodged a false case which was registered as Sare P.S. Case No. 31 of 2019 under sections 392 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code with intention to cheat the Flip Cart Company.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegation that the case i.e. Sare P.S. Case No. 31 of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38207 of 2019(3) dt.04-09-2019 2/2 2019 was lodged by the petitioner with false allegation, is incorrect. It is further submitted that while the investigation in Sare P.S. Case No. 31 of 2019 was still continuing, the instant case being Sare P.S. Case No. 35 of 2019 was registered against the petitioner under sections 406,182 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 30.04.2019.

The application for bail has been opposed by the learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Sare P.S. Case No. 35 of 2019. (Partha Sarthy, J) Prakash/- U T