Lalan Dubey @ Lalan Dwevedy v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26643 of 2017 (3) dt.17-07-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26643 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -54 Year- 2017 Thana -PATAHI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================

1. Lalan Dubey @ Lalan Dwevedy Son of Rup Narayan Dwevedy, Resident of Village- Patahi, P.S.- Patahi, District- Motihari (East Champaran). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 17-07-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Patahi Police Station Case No. 54 of 2017, disclosing offences under Sections 379 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30 & 32 of the Forest Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner, who is of clean antecedent, is innocent and has not committed any offence. As a matter of fact, two F.I.Rs. being Patahi P.S. Case No. 44 of 2017 and Patahi P.S. Case No. 54 of 2017 for the same offence have been lodged by the authorities. In the first F.I.R., this petitioner has not been named rather other accused persons, namely, Ram Prasad Paswan and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26643 of 2017 (3) dt.17-07-2017 Santu Mahto, who are said to have been punished for the said offence and granted regular bail by the learned court below, have been made accused in the said case, which is evident from the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence nor any cogent material is available to implicate the petitioner in the alleged occurrence. Hence, the petitioner deserves the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks, 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VIII, Motihari (East Champaran) in connection with Patahi Police Station Case No. 54 of 2017, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T