Binay Jha @ Binay Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57873 of 2015 (2) dt.30-01-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.57873 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -578 Year- 2015 Thana -ARARIA District- ARRARIA ======================================================

1. Binay Jha @ Binay Kumar Jha Son of late Pandit Prem Sundar Jha Resident of Village-Madanpur, Police station Madanpur, District Araria. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Makardhwaj Upadhyay For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 30-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 578 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 435 and 436 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the informant saw that his shop was set on fire then he saw the petitioner fleeing away on his motorcycle with one man. Thereafter, Fire Brigade came but till then his shop was burnt. It is claimed that earlier the petitioner has committed theft of rupees one thousand from the shop and his photo was captured in Laptop and to destroy that the petitioner has committed the crime. Submission is of false implication and that from the FIR itself it is apparent that the informant has not seen the petitioner setting the shop on fire, it was dead night, local villagers informed the Fire Brigade, due to earlier dispute the petitioner has been implicated, the FIR has been lodged after much delay, no offence under Section 436

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57873 of 2015 (2) dt.30-01-2016 IPC is made out as the same was not dwelling house, the petitioner has been mercilessly beaten by the informant and his men and was produced before the Police resulting he is suffering in custody since 23.11.2015.

Learned APP fairly submits that the shop of the informant was bunt and not the house.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the period of detention of the petitioner, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 578 of 2015, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a 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) avin/- U T