Arjun Singh Yadav @ Arjun Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.661 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -35 Year- 2014 Thana -SIMULTALA District- JAMUI ======================================================
1. Arjun Singh Yadav, @ Arjun Singh, Son of Bhajan Lal, Resident of Village- Khajuria, Police Station- Alau, District- Mainpuri (U.P.)
2. Bimlesh Kumar @ Vimal @ Bimlesh Singh, Son of Surendra Singh, Resident of Village- Bhagya Nagar, Police Station- Kishni, DistrictMainpuri (U.P.).
3. Suresh Kumar @ Sarvesh Kumar, Son of Ganga Ram Sharma,
4. Ravi Singh @ Ravi Kumar Singh @ Raviya, Son of Pratap Singh Chauhan. Both are Resident of Village Puwaya, Police Station- Kishni, District- Mainpuri (U.P.).
5. Umedh Singh @ Umed Singh, Son of Panchilal Yadav, Resident of Village- Harish Chandrapur, Police Station- Alau, District- Mainpuri (U.P.).
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Nand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-01-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State.
Petitioners are languishing in custody since 23.12.2015 in connection with Simultalla P.S.Case No.35 of 2014 for offence alleged under Sections 379 and 511 of the IPC and 15(2) and 15(4) of the PMP (Amendment) Act.
The Deputy MO of Barauni Refinery lodged the present case alleging that some unknown miscreants attempted to take out oil from pipe line near channel no.378.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.661 of 2017 (2) dt.11-01-2017 2/2 petitioners that the petitioners have falsely been implicated merely on suspicion and on the basis of alleged confessional statement taken in connection with Simultalla P.S.Case No.54 of 2015. There is no eye witness or any material substantiating alleged filling of oil. He further submits that the petitioners are neither named in the FIR nor were apprehended at the spot and they have been falsely remanded in this case. He further submits that the petitioners have remained in jail custody for more than one year. However, learned APP for the State submits that the petitioners carry criminal antecedents, and so they do not deserve bail.
These petitioners have been remanded in the case on the basis of the alleged confession and they remained in custody for a considerable period.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the above named petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Jamui in connection with Simultalla P.S.Case No.35 of 2014. (Sanjay Kumar, J) B.Kr./- U T