Prabhu Sah @ Prabhuchandra Sah vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2334 Patna

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 946 of 2021
             Arising Out of PS Case No.-53 Year-2020 Thana- KARJAIN District- Supaul
      ======================================================

1. Prabhu Sah @ Prabhuchandra Sah, aged about 40 years, Male Son of Fulo Sah, Resident of Village - Bouraha, Ward No.12, PS- Karjain, District- Supaul.

2. Chandeshwari Ram, aged about 53 years, Male, Son of Ashrafi Ram, Resident of Village - Bouraha, Ward No.12, PS- Karjain, District- Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

      For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Nafisuzzoha, Advocate
      For the State            :       Mr. Md. Arif, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 09-06-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. The case has been heard out of turn on the basis of

motion slip filed by learned counsel for the petitioners yesterday,

which was allowed.

3. Heard Mr. Nafisuzzoha, learned counsel for the

petitioners and Mr. Md. Arif, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

(hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

4. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with

Karjain PS Case No. 53 of 2020 dated 12.06.2020, instituted

under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.946 of 2021 dt.09-06-2021

5. The allegation against the petitioners is that they had

stolen vegetables from the field of the informant.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

they are neighbours and the allegation is false due to local rivalry.

It was submitted that only on suspicion, even though it is stated

initially that the informant could not identify the culprits, but later

on, it is stated that they were recognized. As far as the recovery of

mobile of petitioner no. 1 is concerned, learned counsel submitted

that it was a small mobile which was lost a day earlier and most

importantly, the said mobile was never handed over to the police

as the FIR does not show that there was any article seized or

handed over to the police by the informant. Learned counsel

submitted that being a neighbour, the mobile number of the

petitioner no. 1 was well known to the informant and that is why

he has only stated about the mobile number and not the details of

the mobile set, which clearly shows that no mobile set was

recovered. It was submitted that the petitioners have no criminal

antecedent. Learned counsel submitted that it is surprising that

though in the said FIR, it has also been alleged that vegetables

worth Rs. 500/- had been stolen from the informant's field and

vegetables worth Rs. 3,000/- had been stolen from another

person's field i.e., Vinod Mehta, but he has not lodged any FIR.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.946 of 2021 dt.09-06-2021

7. Learned APP submitted that the petitioners were seen

in the torch light and had stolen the vegetables. However, it was

not controverted that as per the estimate of the informant himself,

vegetables worth Rs. 500/- had been stolen.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the

event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six

weeks from today, the petitioners be released on bail upon

furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each

with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in Karjain PS Case No.

53 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2)

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and further, (i) that one

of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners, (ii) that

the petitioners and the bailors shall execute bond and give

undertaking with regard to good behaviour of the petitioners and

(iii) that the petitioners shall co-operate with the

police/prosecution and the Court. Any violation of the terms and

conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or failure to co-operate

shall lead to cancellation of their bail bonds.

9. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any

violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioners, to Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.946 of 2021 dt.09-06-2021

the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate

action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the

petitioners.

10. The application stands disposed off in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T