Patna High Court - Orders
Bikram Singh Ji @ Bikram Pratap Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 17 September, 2014
Author: Ahsanuddin Amanullah
Bench: Ahsanuddin Amanullah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.36289 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -89 Year- 2010 Thana -LAXMIPUR District- JAMUI
======================================================
Bikram Singh Ji @ Bikram Pratap Singh Son of Late Subedar Singh,
resident of Village - Jamua , P.S. -Katoria , District - Banka .
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
For the Opposite Party/s :
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL ORDER
2 17-09-2014Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in Laxmipur (Gidhour) P.S. Case No. 89 of 2010 dated 25.05.2010 corresponding to G.R. No. 910 of 2010 instituted under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.
Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner annexing the document procured under the Right to Information Act with regard to the presence of the informant of Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36289 of 2014 (2) dt.17-09-2014 2/4 the case who was the then S.H.O. of the police station at the relevant time.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though as per the F.I.R., he is the person who is directly charged with having fired on the deceased but the informant himself was the then S.H.O. of the concerned police station and his presence at the time of occurrence is genuinely doubtful. It is submitted that the incident is alleged to have taken place at 11:00 P.M. on 24.05.2010 whereas on 24.05.2010 as per the information received under the Right to Information Act, he had proceeded to Begusarai from the district of Banka for deposing in a case and had resumed his duty at 8:00 P.M. on 25.05.2010. It is submitted that it was not possible for him to have been present at the place of occurrence and anything said by him cannot be believed. It is further submitted that the manipulation is very much clear as the fardbeyan and F.I.R. were ante dated by him. It is submitted that as per the certified copy of the order dated 25.05.2010 of the Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, the petitioner was arrested in connection with non F.I.R. No. 2 of 2010 on 24.05.2010 and forwarded to jail custody from where he was released only on 25.05.2010. Learned counsel submits that these Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36289 of 2014 (2) dt.17-09-2014 3/4 two reliable documentary evidence in favour of the petitioner show that the informant could not have been at the place of occurrence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that he being a local activist, due to rivalry has been implicated at the behest of other leaders in connivance with the local police. It is submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 18.06.2014. Learned counsel submits that even the investigation of the case has been done in a manner which speaks for itself. He submits that thrice the case was investigated and on two occasions the police found him to be innocent and had submitted final form against him though subsequently the third time he was implicated and charged under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code but not under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned A.P.P does not dispute the aforesaid position.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Jamui in Laxmipur Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36289 of 2014 (2) dt.17-09-2014 4/4 (Gidhour) P.S. Case No. 89 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. No. 910 of 2010. The petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and be present before the Court on each and every date. Failure to do so on two consecutive dates, without sufficient cause, shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) Anjani/-
U T