Pintu Kumar Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38332 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -64 Year- 2013 Thana -SIWAN MUFFASIL District- SIWAN ======================================================

1. Pintu Kumar Gupta, Son of Durga Prasad, Resident of Village- Aakopur, Police Station- Siwan Muffasil, District- Siwan. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raghav Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Madan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 05-10-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 394 and 397 of the I.P.C and section 27 of the Arms Act.

Allegedly, one Maya Bhagat and one unknown aged 20 to 22 years came and demanded ransom from the informant resulting there was some altercation and then Maya Bhagat opened fire which hit in the leg and back of the informant and then the informant raised alarm calling Motilal Bhagat and he came and then he was also shot which hit in his thigh. The informant claims to identify them after seeing. During investigation the name of the petitioner transpires in the statement of the spy as the petitioner was moving on the road at the time of occurrence. Submission is of false implication and that the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38332 of 2016 (2) dt.05-10-2016 2/2 petitioner is in custody since 25.12.2015 but he has not been put on the test identification parade so as to identify by the informant as second co-accused, no witness has stated the name of the petitioner and without any legal and tangible material the petitioner is suffering in custody only on the basis that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent.

The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that besides the statement of the spy there is no other tangible material against the petitioner and besides criminal antecedent of the petitioner there is no other material against the petitioner.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, the petitioner is directed to 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 C.J.M. Siwan in Siwan Muffasil (Mahadeva) P.S. Case No. 64 of 2013, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T