Back
HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy
DINESH MUKHIYA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR – Respondent
CR. MISC./20488/2022
An accused is entitled to bail if they have been in custody for a significant period of time, the chargesheet has been submitted without them being put on a T.I. parade, and their co-accused has been granted bail.
Headnote:
BAIL - SECTION 395 IPC - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was arrested for allegedly being part of a group of 8-10 people who robbed the informant at gunpoint. The petitioner was arrested along with another accused, Vikash Kumar, while the others escaped. The petitioner claimed that he was falsely implicated and that no incriminating evidence was found on him.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that the petitioner had been in custody since July 28, 2021, and that the chargesheet had been submitted without the petitioner being put on a T.I. parade. The court also considered the fact that the co-accused, Vikash Kumar, had been granted bail.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail considering the following factors: (i) the petitioner had been in custody for a significant period of time; (ii) the chargesheet had been submitted without the petitioner being put on a T.I. parade; and (iii) the co-accused had been granted bail.
Final Decision: The court granted the petitioner bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20488 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-194 Year-2021 Thana- UDAKISHUNGANJ District-
Madhepura
======================================================
DINESH MUKHIYA SON OF TANUK LAL MUKHIYA R/O VILLAGE-
SINBARA, WARD NO.11, P.S.- UDAKISHUNGANJ, DISTRICT-
MADHEPURA
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
4
11-01-2023
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner has preferred this application for grant
of regular bail in a case registered under section 395 of the
Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, while the informant was
travelling in his vehicle and reached near a brick-kiln, it is stated
that 8-10 accused persons armed with various weapons
assaulted the informant and took away Rs.12,000/ besides other
articles mentioned in the F.I.R. It is stated that in the meantime,
a police vehicle arrived and two accused persons namely Vikash
Kumar and the petitioner herein were caught. Others managed
to escape.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20488 of 2022(4) dt.11-01-2023
2/2
that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He
was caught under a misunderstanding. No incriminating article
has been recovered from his possession nor has he been put on
T.I. parade. His case stands on a similar footing to that of Vikash
Kumar who has been enlarged on bail vide order dated
9.12.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. no.50655 of 2022.
Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the petitioner being in custody since
28.7.2021, chargesheet having been submitted without putting
the petitioner on T.I. parade together with grant of bail to co-
accused Vikash Kumar, the Court directs the petitioner to be
enlarged on bail in connection with Udakishunganj P.S. Case
no.194 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate
1st Class, Udakishunganj, District-Madhepura.
Saurabh/-
(Partha Sarthy, J)
U
T
