Md. Furkan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.8974 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -41 Year- 2014 Thana -PURAINI District- MADHEPURA ======================================================
1. Md. Furkan Son of Md. Kare, resident of village- Ganeshpur, Diayara, P.S.- Puraini, District- Madhepura .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shekhar Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.L. Pandit (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 25-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Puraini P.S. Case No. 41 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and further Sections 302 and 201 have also been added. The petitioner is not named in the First Information Report. During investigation his name transpired. It is submitted that co-accused Ramesh Singh in his confessional statement has disclosed the name of the petitioner also. That Ramesh Singh has already been allowed bail vide Cri. Misc. No. 41355 of 2015. Other F.I.R. named accused persons have also been allowed bail and, as such, the petitioner also deserves sympathetic
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8974 of 2016 (2) dt.25-04-2016 2/2 consideration to which the learned A.P.P. does not dispute. In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner above named is also directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri. Pradeep Kr. Chaudhary, learned J.M. 1st Class, Udakishunganj, Madhepura in connection with Puraini P.S. Case No. 41 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. No. 878 of 2014 subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) sushma/- U T