Praduman Kumar @ Pradum Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84337 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2023 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== PRADUMAN KUMAR @ PRADUM KUMAR SON OF NARESH YADAV R/O VILLAGE- SALIMPUR, P..S- SALIMPUR, DIST.- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amrendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 05-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently added Section 395, 412, 120B of the IPC and Sections 25(1-B)A and 26 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, the informant who was posted as Branch Manager in South Bihar Gramin Bank, Branch- Garhi Bishanpur was working in the aforesaid Bank. It is further alleged that two unknown miscreants entered into the Branch and looted away cash of Rs. 94,050 on the point of pistol.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84337 of 2023(2) dt.05-01-2024 2/2 committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and the same has been lodged against unknown persons. The name of the petitioner has come into light, on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Sujit Kumar and Kundan Kumar, which has got no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. Nothing incriminating/looted articles have been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. No T.I. Parade has been done. Petitioner has got no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. He is languishing in judicial custody since 24.04.2023.

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. 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 C.J.M., Lakhisarai in connection with Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 145 of 2023.

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