Ravi Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75575 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2019 Thana- TANKUPPA District- Gaya ====================================================== Ravi Raj Son of Late Ravindra Yadav Resident of Village - Uda Bigha, P.S.- Chandauti, District - Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 19-12-2019 It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is a typographical error in paragraph 27 of the petition wherein the date of custody is mentioned as 03.10.2019 instead of 30.08.2019.

As prayed, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to correct the same in course of the day. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 87 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, the son of the informant was taken away by the four named accused persons and did not return. Thereafter his mobile phone was discovered to be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75575 of 2019(3) dt.19-12-2019 2/3 switched off. It is further submitted that subsequently the informant saw the video on a mobile phone of the second son wherein he identified the dead bodies of his son and another dead body of his son's friend.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name has transpired in course of investigation with the allegation that he had given shelter to one of the named accused Sujeet @ Tirel Yadav. It is submitted that said Sujeet @ Tirel Yadav happens to be brother-in-law of this petitioner and it was because of the relationship that he visits the petitioner and except this material, no other material has transpired to implicate him in the crime. Petitioner is in custody since 30.08.2019 and has no criminal antecedent.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the informant that in paragraph 82 of the case diary confession of petitioner has been recorded in which he has disclosed that the main accused Sujeet @ Tirel Yadav was staying with him. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case including the fact that besides petitioner not being named in the FIR, in course of investigation, no material has transpired

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75575 of 2019(3) dt.19-12-2019 3/3 against him to implicate him in the crime in question, the petitioner is in custody since 30.08.2019 and has no criminal antecedent, 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. 1st, Gaya in connection with Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 87 of 2019.

(Partha Sarthy, J) sushma/- U T