Shushant Pandey @ Sonu Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46214 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -184 Year- 2017 Thana -BHABHUA District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR) ====================================================== Shushant Pandey @ Sonu Pandey, son of late Ved Prakash Pandey, resident of Bhabua, Ward No. 19, P.S. Bhabua, Distt. Kaimur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar-1, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bhabua P.S. Case No. 184 of 2017, registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code was added.

The petitioner is not named in the First information Report. It appears that during investigation, his name has transpired.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that neither any recovery has been made from possession of the petitioner nor he has been put on Test Identification Parade. Although, it is alleged in the impugned order that he has been identified from the footage of CC T.V. camera and the same is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46214 of 2017 (2) dt.19-09-2017 2/2 mentioned in paragraphs 215 to 241 of the case diary, but in those paragraphs nothing has been mentioned showing the identification of petitioner in CC TV camera footage. The petitioner is in custody for about 5 1⁄2 months.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that his identity was captured in the footage of CC TV Camera.

In view of the rival submission of both sides, this application is disposed of with a direction to the learned trial court to verify the case diary specially paragraphs 215 to 241 of the case diary, and if the identity of the petitioner was not captured in the footage of CC T.V. camera, he will release the petitioner to his own satisfaction.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) S.Ali/- U T