Patna High CourtCR. MISC./52767/2024bail granted

Jyotis Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-10-18Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52767 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2023 Thana- DESARI District- Vaishali ====================================================== Jyotis Kumar Son of Raju Chaudhary Resident of Vill- Barbatta, P.S.- Sonepur, District- Saran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kaushal Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-10-2024 Heard Mr. Kaushal Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 30.01.2024, in connection with Desari (Sahdei O.P.) P.S. Case No. 322 of 2023, FIR dated 23.09.2023 registered for the offence under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, when the informant along with his family members were sleeping at his door at on 23.09.2023 at 5:00 A.M. when he woke up, he saw that the door of the house was opened and cash of Rs. 1,15,000/- and the ornaments, which were kept in a box were stolen after breaking the box, by the unknown persons.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

2/4 submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the name of the petitioner has been transpired in this case during investigation on the basis of the self-confessional statement of the petitioner in Patori P.S. Case No. 603 of 2023 in which he has confessed his guilt in the present case and on that basis the petitioner was remanded in this case. He further submits that it appears from the record that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession or from the house of the petitioner. He further submits that coaccused person, namely, Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Mahto has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 21.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.

46683 of 2024 and co-accused person, namely, Sanjeev Kumar has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 21.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 46878 of 2024. He further submits that the police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet in this case against the petitioner. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 30.01.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has confessed his guilt in the present crime in question and apart from that the petitioner carries nine

3/4 more cases other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of the para-3 of the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in all the pending matters.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the, above named, petitioner 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hajipur in connection with Desari (Sahdei OP) P.S. Case No. 322 of 2023 with the following conditions:- (i) Petitioner shall co-operate 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 on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be canceled by the Court below.

(ii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

4/4 cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) ajay/- U T