Tuntun Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65992 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2021 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Vikash Kumar S/o- Pramod Patel R/o Vill.- Vishunpur Sariya, P.S. - Deoria, Dist.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 66518 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2021 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Tuntun Mahto S/o Harendra Mahto R/o Vill- Bisunpur Sariya Deoria, P.S.- Deoria, Dist- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21228 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2021 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Chandan Nut @ Chandan Khalifa Son of Salim Nut @ Bhawendra Nut Resident of village - Tilvishta, P.S. - Saraiya, O.P. Jaintpur, District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 65992 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No.II, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Prasad, A.P.P.
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 66518 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajeev Ranjan No.II, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P.
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21228 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate Ms. Rupa Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, A.P.P.
2/4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 28-06-2022 Since all the cases arise from same P.S. Case, as such, they have been heard together which being disposed off by a common order.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
Let the defect(s), if any, as pointed out by the office be removed within four weeks from today.
In the present case, the petitioners seek bail in connection with Shebganj P.S. Case No. 222 of 2021 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 457 and 382 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case is that the petitioners along with other co-accused persons trespassed in the house of the informant and looted T.V. set, mobile phones, cash, jewelry, wrist watches and some cloths.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case, nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners, Test Identification Parade has not been conducted so far though the F.I.R. was registered against unknown, the petitioners have been
3/4 named in this case merely on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused and except for that there is no material against the petitioners.
Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioners submitting that the petitioners are having criminal antecedent and their names transpired in the confessional statement of the co-accused for their involvement in the occurrence as stated in the F.I.R.
Having regard to the submissions made hereinabove and considering the fact that no Test Identification Parade has been conducted and nothing incriminating has been recovered from the petitioners and further considering the period of custody, the petitioners above named, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1st (West), Muzaffarpur in connection with Shebganj P.S. Case No. 222 of 2021, subject to the following conditions : (i) The bail bond of the petitioners shall be accepted only after framing of charge, if not already framed. (ii) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners.
4/4 (iii) The petitioners will remain present on each and every day fixed by the court below.
(iv) In case of absence for three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) ved/- U T