Rajiv Raushan @ Monu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3029 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2019 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya ====================================================== RAJIV RAUSHAN @ MONU Son of Ashok Prasad Singh Resident of Village-Tetua, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey (App84) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 379 of the Indian Penal Code and later on Sections 411/34 of the Indian Penal Code was also added.

Allegation is recovery of one stolen motorcycle form the possession of three accused persons including the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The stolen motorcycle has been recovered from the house of One Naresh Chaudhary but the police has shown false recovery from the possession of the petitioner and two others. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 03.10.2019. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3029 of 2020(2) dt.18-01-2020 2/2 the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below where the case is pending in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 261/19, with following conditions:- (1)Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court below.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) Sanjay/- U T