Sonu Kumar vs. The State Of Bihar
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar, sought bail in Sasaram Town P.S. Case No. 968 of 2024, registered under Sections 303(2)/334(1) and 317 of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, a driver for the informant, along with 8-10 others, stole goods worth Rs. 15,00,000/- from the informant's godown using various vehicles. The petitioner claimed innocence, stating he was falsely implicated due to a dispute over wages. He argued that the informant conducted business without proper GST receipts and documents. The petitioner also highlighted that co-accused, from whose shops the allegedly stolen articles were recovered, had been granted bail after making online payments to the informant. The petitioner had been in custody since November 27, 2024, and a charge-sheet had been submitted.
Held
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, Sonu Kumar. The Court considered the submissions made by both parties, particularly the probability of false implication given the background of payments received by the informant from co-accused. The Court also took into account the petitioner's clean antecedent, his period of custody, and the submission of the charge-sheet. Based on these factors, the Court directed the petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount. The bail was subject to the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, including that one bailor must be a close relative, the petitioner must attend court on every date, and his bail would be liable for cancellation upon absence for three consecutive dates or violation of bail terms.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in connection with Sasaram Town P.S. Case No. 968 of 2024, considering the allegations of theft and the surrounding circumstances? (Mixed question of law and fact) Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated due to a dispute over payment and wages with the informant. He argued that the informant engaged in selling goods without proper receipts to evade GST, and the petitioner was merely acting on the informant's instructions. The petitioner also pointed out that co-accused, from whom recovered articles were found, had been granted bail after making payments to the informant, suggesting a potential fabricated case. The petitioner emphasized his clean antecedent, period of custody, and the submission of charge-sheet as grounds for bail. Revenue/State's Arguments: The learned APP and the informant's counsel opposed the bail application, with the informant's counsel stating that the petitioner assisted co-accused in stealing the informant's goods.
Sections Cited
Section 437(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER 2 15-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.
In this present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sasaram Town P.S. Case No. 968 of 2024 dated 26.11.2024 registered for the offences under Sections 303(2)/ 334(1) and 317 of the B.N.S.
As per prosecution case, informant found the doors of his godown to be opened in the night and on going through the CCTV footage, he found the petitioner who has been working as driver along with 8-10 persons taking away the goods kept in the godown by different vehicles and in this manner goods worth of Rs. 15,00,000/- was stolen.
2/4
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner has been working as the driver of the informant and in order to save GST, the informant used to sale the goods without proper receipt and documents. Petitioner had been working on the instruction of the informant. Learned counsel further submits that while granting bail to the other co-accused persons the fact was noted that they have made payment online to the informant towards the articles shown to have been taken from the godown of the informant. Allegedly stolen articles have been recovered from the shop of the co-accused persons and these persons have been granted bail. Learned counsel further submits that as the petitioner has been working as driver of the informant and some dispute arose over payment and wages and the petitioner refused to drive the vehicle, he was falsely implicated in the instant case. Petitioner is in custody since 27.11.2024 and charge-sheet has been submitted. Petitioner is having clean antecedent.
Learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant oppose the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner have helped the co-accused in stealing the goods of 3/4 the informant.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the probability of false implication in the background of payment received by the informant from the co-accused and further considering the clean antecedent of the petitioner as well as his period of custody and submission of charge-sheet, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas/concerned court in connection with Sasaram Town P.S. Case No. 968 of 2024, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and other following conditions: (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner. (ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below. (iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the 4/4 petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
balmukund/- (Arun Kumar Jha, J) U T
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.