Sanjeev Kumar @ Sonu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.27290 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -182 Year- 2017 Thana -SASARAM MUFFSIL District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Sanjeev Kumar @ Sonu, son of Bhagwan Singh, resident of VillageMahavir Sthan, Kuraich, Sasaram, Police Station- Sasaram (T), DistrictRohtas at Sasaram. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party : Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 01-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is accused in Sasaram (Mufassil) P.S. Case No. 182 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner is in custody since 18.02.2017. There is specific assertion in paragraph no. 13 that the petitioner was not put on Test Identification Parade and on the basis of alleged confessional statement he has been implicated in this case. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner was not named in the F.I.R. as the case was registered against unknown and in the absence of T.I. Parade keeping the petitioner in custody is bad in the eye of law.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27290 of 2017 (2) dt.01-07-2017 2/2 Having regard to the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 18.02.2017 and he has not been put on Test Identification Parade and the fact that case was registered against unknown, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, above named, 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Sasaram (Mufassil) P.S. Case No. 182 of 2017, subject to the condition that the court below will satisfy itself on the issue of antecedent of the petitioner and further on the condition that the petitioner will extend full cooperation in conclusion of the trial and will not, in any manner, influence the witnesses. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) SHAHZAD/- U T