HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan
UTKARSH RAJ @RAKESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
The State – Respondent
CR. MISC./56053/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56053 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-904 Year-2019 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Utkarsh Raj @RAKESH Kumar Son Of Krishnandan Tiwari @ Krishnanand
Tiwari Resident Of Village- Saraiya, P.S.- Sakra, District-Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Shanti Bhushan Singh, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN
ORAL ORDER
2
06-10-2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for
the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the
defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceeding.
In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken
period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.
Earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide
order dated 09.11.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 24541 of 2020.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Hajipur Town P.S.
Case No. 904 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 406, 420, 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegation against the petitioner is that petitioner on a false
promise took away four vehicles from the informant. It is alleged that
petitioner asked the informant to provide four to five vehicles for
Excise Department on a fixed rent of Rs. 14,000/- for each vehcile
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56053 of 2021(2) dt.06-10-2021
2/3
and also executed a deed of agreement on plain paper but on demand
petitioner did not pay the monthly fixed rent and he did not return
back the aforesaid vehicles to the informant.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has
falsely been implicated in this case and has not committed any
offence as alleged in the FIR. He submits that no case under Section
379 of the Indian Penal Code is made out since it was a business deal
and there is no question of entrustment. He also submits that charge
in this case has been framed on 21.08.2021. No incriminating article
has been recovered from his conscious physical possession. The
allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general
and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as
has been mentioned in para 3 of this bail application and he is
languishing in custody since 21.03.2021.
Learned APP for the State opposed the bail petition.
Considering the facts aforesaid and the period of custody of
the petitioner, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged
on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is
pending/successor Court in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case
No. 904 of 2019 subject to the following conditions:
(1) One of the bailors will be own close relative of the
petitioner who will give on affidavit genealogy as to how he is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56053 of 2021(2) dt.06-10-2021
3/3
relative to petitioner. The bailor will also undertake to inform the
court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.
(2) The bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform
the court concerned if the petitioner is made accused in any other
case of similar nature after his release in the present case and
thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding
for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse.
(3) The petitioner shall remain physically present in the court
on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two
consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be
liable to be cance