Binod Ram @ Vinod Ram @ Navin Jee v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72332 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2015 Thana- MALI District- Aurangabad ====================================================== BINOD RAM @ VINOD RAM @ NAVIN JEE Son of Mukhraj Ram @ Mukhraj Paswan Resident of Village - ord Golgariva, P.s.- Kutumba, Distt.- Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mali P.S. Case No. 59 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 452, 427, 435, and 436 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3, 4, 5 of the Explosive Substance Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act along with Section 17 of C.L.A. Act.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 22.10.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case and has antecedent of ten cases and the informant alleges that 30-40 criminals came and took out all the inmates of the house and blew the house with bomb and even
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72332 of 2021(2) dt.23-05-2022 2/3 put a tractor ablaze, and thereafter fled firing in the air. The learned counsel submits that the FIR was against unknown and the name of this petitioner transpired during the course of investigation as Naveen without parentage and address, it is next submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that if the accused as alleged in the FIR had intention to kill the informant and his family members then why they would have taken out the inmates out of the house and thereafter would have exploded the house with bomb and thus create evidence against themselves as the informant and his family members would have seen the criminal committing the occurrence. It is next submitted that co-accused Sanjay Singh who has antecedent of more than ten cases has been granted bail by order dated 20.09.2018 in Cr. Misc. No. 55365 of 2018. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 22.10.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case, co-accused has been granted bail and taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72332 of 2021(2) dt.23-05-2022 3/3 two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Mali P.S. Case No. 59 of 2015 with a condition that one of the bailor of the petitioner shall be his father Mukhraj Ram @ Mukhraj Paswan.
Further if the learned court below comes to a conclusion that the petitioner after his release is trying to delay the trial of the case in any manner, the court below shall forthwith cancel his bail bonds after recording reasons. (Satyavrat Verma, J) shahzad/- U T