Atul Kumar Pandey vs. The State Of Bihar

Held

The Court granted bail to the petitioner. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedent and the absence of any allegation of a specific overt act in the commission of the crime. The Court noted that the petitioner's alleged role was only as a conspirator. Furthermore, the petitioner had been in custody since October 12, 2018, and the investigation was complete. The bail was granted on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount. A specific condition was imposed that the bailors should be local traders registered with GST.

Facts

The petitioner, Atul Kumar Pandey, sought bail in connection with Sahajitpur P.S. Case No. 96 of 2018, registered for offences under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-a)b/27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner had been in custody since October 12, 2018. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was a conspirator in the commission of the crime, and the mother of the deceased stated that the petitioner played the role of a 'liner' in the crime. The petitioner claimed to have no criminal antecedent. The investigation in the case was complete.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail, considering his lack of criminal antecedent, his alleged role as a conspirator, and the completion of the investigation? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that he had no criminal antecedent and was in custody since October 12, 2018. His role was alleged to be only that of a conspirator, with no specific overt act attributed to him in the commission of the crime. The investigation was also complete. Revenue/State's Contention: The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) referred to the case diary and stated that the mother of the deceased, in her statement, identified the petitioner as playing the role of a 'liner' in the commission of the crime.