Krishna Kumar @ Gopal Kumar @ Gopal Kumar Singh@Krishn Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21662 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -87 Year- 2015 Thana -PURANHIA District- SHEOHAR ====================================================== Krishna Kumar @ Gopal Kumar @ Gopal Kumar Singh@Krishn Kumar .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Madhuranand Jha (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Purnahiya P.S. case no. 87/2015 registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is not named in the first information report and it is submitted that he is in custody since 24.02.2016 but he has not been put on test identification parade. The name of the petitioner has been transpired in the confessional statement of Parmesh Kumar and the motorcycle was also recovered from the possession of Parmesh Kumar. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of petitioner and as such, he deserves sympathetic consideration. Similarly situated co-accused Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Mahto, Kanahiya Kumar and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21662 of 2016 (3) dt.15-07-2016 2/2 Abhimanyu Kumar have already been granted bail, to which, the learned A.P.P. does not dispute.

In the facts and circumstances state above, petitioner abovenamed 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheohar in connection with Purnahiya P.S. case no. 87/2015, 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 the privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) rinkee/- U T