Ram Kumar Azad vs State Of Bihar

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

Heard Mr. Bhim Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter

referred to as the ‘APP’) for the State.

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Motihari Bapudham (GRP Motihari) Rail PS Case No. 88 of 2018 dated 14.12.2018, instituted

under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code to which later on Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code was added.

The petitioner along with others is accused of being party to the theft of the purse of the wife of the informant containing two lady’s gold ring,

one mangalsutra, a pair of gold earring and one Samsung Mobile J-17.

By order dated 09.03.2021, in view of the stand of learned counsel for the petitioner that the Samsung Mobile J-7 set, which was recovered from

his house was sold to him by one Babul Kumar, a resident of neighboring village, in support of which learned counsel drew the attention of the Court

to a document dated 09.11.2018 signed by the petitioner and the said Babul Kumar indicating that the petitioner had bought the mobile set for Rs.

2,800/-, the Court had asked for a report from the Superintendent of Railway Police, Muzaffarpur but when the same was not properly submitted, the

Court had directed both the Superintendent of Railway Police, Muzaffarpur as well as the Deputy Superintendent of Police Rail, Sonepur to file their

personal show cause.

Today, a show cause has been filed but only by the Deputy Superintendent of Railway Police, Muzaffarpur. The Court is surprised as to how

learned APP did not ensure that the Superintendent of Railway Police, Muzaffarpur also filed his personal show cause where there was specific

order.

The Court can only comment on the unfortunate circumstance when learned APP, being Officer of the Court, are not able to get the order

complied, that too in a serious matter requiring a senior Officer of the State to file show cause.

Be that as it may, coming to the merits in the show cause, it has been stated that the stand of learned counsel for the petitioner that the said mobile

was sold to him by one Babul Kumar and in support of which there was a letter of sale, the same was verified that Babul Kumar had sold the mobile

set and issued a sale letter. It is further stated that he has been arrested as a non-FIR accused.

Having regard to the aforesaid and also taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and that he had purchased

the mobile in question from Babul Kumar under bona fide impression that there was nothing illegal about it though a sale letter which has been

accepted by Babul Kumar, the person who had sold the mobile to the petitioner, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six

weeks from today, the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like

amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Railway, Bettiah, West Champaran in Bapudham, Motihari (GRP Motihari)

Rail PS Case No. 88 of 2018, 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 petitioner, and (ii) that the petitioner shall cooperate with the Court/police/prosecution. Failure to cooperate

shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds.

It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioner, to the notice of the Court

concerned, which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.

However, the aspect of the Superintendent of Railway Police, Muzaffarpur not submitting his show cause despite specific direction at paragraphs

no. 6, 7 and 8 of order dated 06.04.2021, which reads as under:-

“6. Thus, the Superintendent of Railway Police, Muzaffarpur as well as the deponent of the affidavit, the Deputy Superintendent Rail,

Sonepur are directed to file their personal show cause with regard to such conduct and why such incorrect statement has been made and

the order of the Court dated09.03.2021, has totally not been complied with.

The Court is also constrained to observe that such conduct on the part of the concerned Superintendent of Police was required to be

pointed out by learned APP before filing the affidavit which, unfortunately, has not been done.

At this juncture, learned APP sought one last indulgence.â€​

In the tentative view of the Court, the Superintendent of Railway Police, Muzaffarpur is in contempt.

However, before issuing Rule in the matter, the Court grants him one more indulgence to file his show cause in the matter, both in terms of order

dated 06.04.2021 and the present order.

In view of what has been recorded earlier, the Court requested Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned APP In-charge to assist in the matter

henceforth.

Accordingly, Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned APP shall communicate the order to the Superintendent of Railway Police, Muzaffarpur for

compliance and the matter be listed on 28th

Let the name of Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned APP be printed in the cause list in the column of the opposite parties.

It is made clear that the matter has been directed to be listed on 28th June, 2021 only for the purpose of considering the show cause of the

Superintendent of Railway Police, Muzaffarpur as otherwise on merits, the same has been disposed off.