Sunil Kumar Gupta @ Sunil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.31614 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -137 Year- 2016 Thana -DURGAWATI District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ====================================================== Sunil Kumar Gupta @ Sunil Kumar, son of Late Kisun Sah, resident of village- Nawanagar, P.S.- Biddupur, District- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sri Anish Chandra (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 16-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel representing the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Durgawati P.S Case No. 137 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 166, 379, 384, 386, 389, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 65(b)(c) Bihar Excise (Amended) Act 2016. The informant alleged that he along with his friends was going to Kolkata on Swift car, bearing registration No. PB12L-2021, which was intercepted by police and one bottle of liquor is shown to have been recovered from the car of the petitioner and for that the police officials demanded bribe, one star person was, Arun Kumar, and two star person was, Chandradeo Prasad, but two other persons went along with informant to withdraw money from ATM and after withdrawing money, the informant handed over Rs. 25,000/- to two star police official.
It is submitted that the petitioner is poor driver of the Excise Department. He was duty bond and was obeying the instruction
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31614 of 2016 (3) dt.16-09-2016 2/2 of the Excise Officials. He has got no role either in taking the money or demanding the bribe. One star person namely Arun Kumar has been allowed pre-arrest bail vide Cr. Miscellaneous No. 29864 of 2016 and the petitioner being poor driver is suffering in custody since 24.05.2016. He has given his statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. also wherein he has stated truth and has become prosecution witness and, as such, now he deserves sympathetic consideration, to which the learned A.P.P. opposes by submitting that according to Subclause (4) to Section 306 of the Cr.P.C., such person shall not be released on bail till termination of the trial unless earlier he was on bail.
In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the limited role of the petitioner now, he is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial magistrate, District- Kaimur at Bhabhua in connection with Durgawati P.S. Case No. 137 of 2016, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be 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.)