Binay Baitha @ Vinay Baitha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.2381 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -242 Year- 2013 Thana -PARIHAR District- SITAMARHI ======================================================
1. Binay Baitha @ Vinay Baitha son of Kishun Baitha Resideny of VillageMahuawa P.s. Parihar, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 17-03-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offence punishable under section 394 of the I.P.C Allegedly, when the informant was returning to his house after closing his shop, in the way the petitioner and other FIR named accused persons surrounded him, stopped his motorcycle, started assaulting with knife and the iron rod, and against the petitioner it is alleged that he took away his mobile, whereas, other co-accused snatched the amount of Rs. 10,000/-, Titan wrist watch and ring and further the petitioner assaulted the informant with katta on his head.
Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner is the co-villager of the informant, the prosecution story
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2381 of 2016 (3) dt.17-03-2016 2/2 appears not probable and reliable, due to the enmity the petitioner has been implicated, the petitioner in no way was connected with the alleged offence, nothing incriminating article has been recovered from possession of the petitioner and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration.
The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent also and further the robbed mobile was recovered from possession of the petitioner.
In the facts and circumstances as stated above, the petitioner shall be released on bail after completion of six months in custody, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Sitamarhi in Parihar P.S. Case No. 242 of 2013, 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) Abhay/- U T