Baskur Jha @ Gajendra Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78504 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2013 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== BASKUR JHA @ GAJENDRA JHA Son of Ram Bahadur Jha R/o vill - Jorpura, P.s. - Tajpur (O.P. Halai), Distt. - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 06-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per F.I.R., the allegation against six unknown miscreants is that they committed robbery of the Bolero vehicle on the point of pistol.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. Neither the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. nor put on T.I.P. There is no any direct and indirect evidence against the petitioner and no any witness whispered a single word against him regarding any involvement in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78504 of 2023(2) dt.06-12-2023 2/2 alleged occurrence. The name of the petitioner came into light on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Naresh Sahni before the police which has no evidendiary value in the eye of law and co-accused Naresh Sahni has already been enlarged on bail by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.01.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 40333 of 2014. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 12.09.2023.

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 as well as period of custody, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail after framing of charge. 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.-VI, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No.164 of 2013.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) lata/- U T