Satyendra Ravidas @ Bidhayak v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11474 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2016 Thana- SIRDALA District- Nawada ====================================================== Satyendra Ravidas @ Bidhayak S/O Mahabir Ravidas R/O Village-Arai, P.SDaudnagar, District-Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Man Mohan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Kumar Ranjeet Ranjan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 06-07-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual court proceeding.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceeding. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sirdala P.S. Case No. 264 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 379, 427, 436, 504, 506, 387 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 15, 18, 19, 20 of the U.A.P. Act. 63 persons were named in the FIR with allegation that they were members of the Naxal Group and had assembled at the referred railway station to commit arson etc. and they commited the same. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and has not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11474 of 2021(2) dt.06-07-2021 2/3 committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He submits that his name has surfaced on the allegations made by the Site Incharge (Munshi) who has stated that he had overheard the names of all the 63 persons while they were addressing each other during the occurrence. No incriminating article has been recovered from his conscious physical possession. He further submits that similary situated co-accused persons have been granted bail by co-ordinate benches of this Court. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since 15.07.2020.
Learned APP for the State opposed the bail petition. Considering the facts aforesaid, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending in connection Sirdala P.S. Case No. 264 of 2016 subject to the following conditions:
(1) One of the bailors will be own close relative of the petitioner who will give on affidavit genealogy as to how he is relative to petitioner. The bailor will also undertake to inform the court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.
(2) The bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is made accused in any other
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11474 of 2021(2) dt.06-07-2021 3/3 case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse.
(3) The petitioner shall remain physically present in the court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned.
(4) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded and make himself available and when so required and in the case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) GAURAV S./- U T