Nityanand Rawat @ Nitiyanand Rawat v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 46270 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2022 Thana- MALAYPUR District- Jamui ====================================================== Nityanand Rawat @ Nitiyanand Rawat Son Of Sukhdeo Rawat R/O Ward No.- 3, Main Road, Sojhana, P.S.- Jhajha, District - Jamui, Pin - 811308. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amit Narayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 11-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution case is that 6,500 bags of cement were found missing from the godown where the petitioner was employed as godown keeper.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that entire prosecution is a fairy tale nurtured by the informant and, in fact, the informant and one Mukesh Kumar sold 6,500 bags of cement kept in the Om Prakash Godown, whereas the petitioner objected the same, they applied criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 46270 of 2022(3) dt.11-01-2023 2/2 force upon him and attempted to kill him, consequently, the petitioner sustained grievous injury on his right shoulder, as such, father of the petitioner instituted a criminal Complaint Case No. 733 of 2022 under Sections 307, 308, 386, 379 and 384/34 of the IPC against Sanjeev Chaudhary (Informant) and Mukesh Kumar. He further submits that nothing was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and there is no material in respect of commission of the offence against the petitioner. Petitioner is in judicial custody since 21.06.2022. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named 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 learned CJM, Jamui in connection with Malaypur P.S. Case No. 66 of 2022. (Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T