Baldeo Ravidas @ Sunil Ravidas @ Deena Ravidas v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.29133 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -264 Year- 2016 Thana -SIRDALA District- NAWADA ====================================================== Baldeo Ravidas @ Sunil Ravidas @ Deena Ravidas Son of Late Lal Mohan Ravidas, resident of Village- Bandaiya, P.S. Bandaiya, District Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 03-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Petitioner is languishing in custody since 21.03.2017 in connection with Sirdala P.S. Case No. 264 of 2016 registered for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 379, 427, 436, 504, 506 and 387 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 15, 18, 19 and 20 of the U.A.P. Act. The prosecution case, as lodged by the police personnel, is that on secret information that some Maoist are assaulting the contractor, who was constructing a bridge near the railway station, they arrived at the place of occurrence. As many as 63 persons have been named in the First Information Report
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29133 of 2017 (3) dt.03-08-2017 2/3 with parentage. They were raising slogan Lal Salam Zindabad Maowadi Zindabad, opened fire, burnt four vehicles and injured some persons.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent, there was a mob attack and petitioner has no connection with the Maoist group and confessional statement of co-accused before the police has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. He further submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no allegation of tampering with the prosecution witnesses by the petitioner and that the injuries on the injured have been found to be simple in nature.
However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let petitioner, above named, be enlarged 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-V, Nawadah in connection with Sirdala P.S. Case No. 264 of 2016, subject to the condition that one of the bailors would be a close relative of the petitioner
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29133 of 2017 (3) dt.03-08-2017 3/3 having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned police station, who will file an affidavit stating his relationship with the petitioner and that if the petitioner indulges in an offence of similar nature in future, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the court below for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Arjun/- U T