Keshav Sah v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50131 of 2016 (2) dt.22-11-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50131 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -553 Year- 2016 Thana -AHIAPUR District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Keshav Sah, son of Late Tufani Sah, resident of village-Mustafapur, P.S. Ahiyapur, District-Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Smt. Anita Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 22-11-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in custody since 18.09.2016 in connection with Ahiyapur P.S.Case No.553 of 2016 registered for offence punishable under Sections 436, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case in short is that on 20.07.2016 her villager Keshav Sah was standing beside her house opening his pant and the informant prohibited, then he started to abuse and threatened to set fire in her house. It is further alleged that on 23.07.2016, the informant had come to her temporary house situated at Mithanpura, and getting the benefit of her absence, petitioner set her house on fire and articles, ornaments, pots and other material were burnt to ashes.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50131 of 2016 (2) dt.22-11-2016 It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case out of suspicion and previous enmity. He submits that the FIR has been lodged after more than one month of the alleged date of occurrence and chargesheet has already been submitted against the petitioner, hence there is no chance of tampering with the evidence and the petitioner has got no criminal history.

However, learned APP for the State submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR, hence opposes the prayer for bail. Be that as it may, since the FIR has been lodged one month after the alleged date of occurrence, chargesheet already having been submitted and also considering the period of custody, 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 CJM, Muzaffarpur in connection with Ahiyapur P.S.Case No.553 of 2016. (Nilu Agrawal, J) B.Kr./- U T