Munna Alam @ Md. Anwar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1836 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2019 Thana- PURUSHOTTAMPUR District- West Champaran ====================================================== MUNNA ALAM @ MD. ANWAR Son of Late Idrish Miya Resident of Village- Sathi Bazar, P.S.- Sathi, District- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rita Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody seeks bail in a case registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Informant has alleged that while he was returning on his motorcycle, he was intercepted by four persons on two motorcycles who on strength of arms looted Rs. 2,50,000/- cash and fled away.

It has been submitted on behalf of petitioner that FIR is against unknown and his name has surfaced in this case on the basis of his own confessional statement and confession made by other co-accused. Nothing incriminating article has been recovered from his possession. Petitioner has not been put on TIP and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1836 of 2020(2) dt.14-01-2020 2/2 charge sheet has already been submitted. Petitioner is in custody since 03.10.2019.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below, in connection with Purushottampur P.S. Case No. 53 of 2019 subject to the conditions that:-

(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 his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty to cancel his bail bond.

(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) veena/- U T