Tuntun Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65390 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2014 Thana- MOTIPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Tuntun Sah, Male, aged about 28 years, Son of Raghunath Sah, Resident of Village - Kanti, Kothiya, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Chandra Shekhar Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Motipur P.S. Case No. 97 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 448, 380, 366 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case is initiated on the written application of the informant Parmila Devi and it is stated that she was constructed a pucca house, Indrajeet Paswan, Dasai Paswan, Sanjay Paswan, Akhilesh PaswanandTuntun Sah were working in the construction of building since a week back. On dated 06.04.2014 at 2 hours in the night Tuntun Sah entered into the house and broken the lock of the box and took out an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and or raising noise by her daughter Sanita Devi the accused persons tied her mouth and take her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65390 of 2019(3) dt.04-12-2019 2/3 away with him.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is false and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner was working as a lbaour in the house of the informant and some amount was due against the work of the petitioner. The petitioner demanded his labour cost from the informant but the informant has not given him his labour charge and due to when some quarrel taken place between both of them. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

, she has stated that her brother was in the house of her Fua but in the statement of her brother before the police, he has stated that in the said night he was slept at Samudayik Bhawan, which is situated about 300 meter away from his house. He further submits that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the same statement before the police has supported the prosecution case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is in jail custody since 07.07.2019 and charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. There is no allegation against the petitioner to tamper with the witnesses.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65390 of 2019(3) dt.04-12-2019 3/3 petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M., West, Muzaffarpur in connection with Motipur P.S. Case No. 97 of 2014. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Nasimul/- U T