Mahesh Kumar Thakur v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
Let the petitioner be released on bail on
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471
- Information Technology Act, 2000 s. 67
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA Mr.Prakash Chandra, Advocate Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ORAL ORDER 2 29-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in Mahua P.S. case No. 813 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code along with Section 67 of the I.T. Act.
Prosecution allegation, in short, is that there is allegation of preparing false provisional appointment letter and school posting letter of Sajia Khatoon.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner is proprietor of Sharma Cyber Cafe. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. The petitioner Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32781 of 2024(2) dt.29-04-2024 has neither prepared any documents nor received any payment for the same. Due to enmity, Sajia Khatoon has taken the name of the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since
18.12.2023 and has no criminal antecedent. Co-accused have been granted bail by this Bench vide Annexure-2 to this application.
Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, period of custody undergone by the petitioner and the charge-sheet being submitted, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Operative part
Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Mahua P.S. case No. 813 of 2023 subject to the following conditions: (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner. (II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32781 of 2024(2) dt.29-04-2024 bail bonds of the petitioner. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Pankaj/- U T
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Let the petitioner be released on bail on
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471; Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 67.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.