Jagdish Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40469 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-369 Year-2024 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Jagdish Pandey S/o Late Devnandan Pandey R/o Village- Simarwar, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 369 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 331(4), 305(a), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per prosecution case, the petitioner is the accused of stealing goods and jewellery worth about Rs. 40,00,000/- from the house of the Informant in a planned manner in connivance with the co-accused persons.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40469 of 2025(2) dt.03-07-2025 2/3 alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the basis of suspicion. The petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that nothing incriminating/looted article has been recovered from the conscious/physical possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in judicial custody since 06.01.2025 without any rhymes or reason.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner, stating that the offence alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and, hence, he does not deserve bail.

6. Having heard rival contention of both the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the period of custody of the petitioner and the petitioner having no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail, after framing of charge if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40469 of 2025(2) dt.03-07-2025 3/3 Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 369 of 2024, subject to the following conditions;

(i) One of the bailor(s) shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner shall cooperate 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 in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the court below.

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