← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2086/2024bail granted

Vikash Ray @ Vikash Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2024-04-18Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2086 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2023 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Vikash Ray @ Vikash Kumar Ray Son Of Brahamdev Yadav Resident Of Village- Sedukha, Tole Mananpur, P.S.- Khanpur, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Pravin Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Gulnar Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2024 Heard Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as Ms. Gulnar Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 167 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 18.06.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 420, 385, 387, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to prosecution case, all the accused persons including this petitioner have taken Rs. 9,80,000/- from the informant in order to allot Gas Agency in favour of the informant but did not do so and when the informant asked to return his money then all the accused persons have threatened him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2086 of 2024(4) dt.18-04-2024 2/3 petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the informant has alleged in the F.I.R that the petitioner has taken Rs. 9,80,000/- for the purpose of allotting Gas Agency to the informant. He further submits that from perusal of the F.I.R it appears that the informant has not mentioned anywhere in the F.I.R that on which date he has paid the amount in question to the petitioner.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has taken loan from the village in order to pay the said amount to the petitioner and apart from that the petitioner carries four criminal antecedents other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in all the four cases.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Samastipur, District- Samastipur in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2086 of 2024(4) dt.18-04-2024 3/3 connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 167 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T