Sunil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77796 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-236 Year-2024 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Sunil Kumar, Son of Lakhindra Ray, Resident of Village- Manohar Chapra, P.S.- Kesariya (OP Bijdhari) District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Dharmendra Nat, Son of Baldeo Nat, R/O Vill.- Bagdiha, PO- Satjora, PSPanapur, Dist.- Saran At Chapra ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 27-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 236 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 140(3) and 87 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner fled away with the wife of the informant. His daughter Arti Kumari disclosed this to the informant. It is further alleged that wife of the informant has four issues. The informant and petitioner were working together.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77796 of 2024(4) dt.27-01-2025 2/2 offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that during investigation, the wife of the informant has given her statement and has stated that due to some dispute, she herself has gone. During course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the matter has been settled outside the Court. The learned counsel for the informant is present and he agrees the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 19.07.2024.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-6th, Saran at Chapra in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 236 of 2024.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T