Dhiraj Kumar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.108 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2021 Thana- KATIHAR MUFFASIL District- Katihar ====================================================== DHIRAJ KUMAR PASWAN SON OF DEO NARAYAN PASWAN Resident of Village - Haflaganj, P.S.- Muffasil, Distt.- Katihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mithilesh Kr. Arya, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Asha Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks after complete start of the physical Court. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 01.07.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted and is a person with clean antecedent. The informant alleges that he along with his nephew were intercepted by five unknown criminals who looted Rs.7,25,000/- from them and also took away articles detailed in the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR was against unknown and name of the petitioner came in the confessional statement of co-accused Sanjay Kumar Paswan. Learned counsel further submits that despite being in custody petitioner was not put

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.108 of 2022(2) dt.24-05-2022 2/2 on T.I. Parade nor any incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the petitioner connecting him with the offence. Learned counsel next submits that during the course of investigation, the police claimed to have identified the petitioner in CCTV footage. Learned counsel also submits that if the petitioner was identified in CCTV footage then nothing prevented the police not to put the petitioner on T.I. Parade for getting him identified by the informant. This amply demonstrates that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 01.07.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted, is a person with clean antecedent and was not put on T.I. Parade nor any incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the petitioner, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Katihar Mufassil P.S. Case No. 103 of 2021.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T