Patna High CourtCR. MISC./51266/2014bail granted

Mohan Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

2015-03-03Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.51266 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -90 Year- 2012 Thana -RUPAULI District- PURNIA ======================================================

1. Mohan Pandey Son of Late Suba Pandey after adoption S/o Naubat Pandey R/o Village Lalganj, P.S. Rupauli (Mohanpur), District Purnia .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shiva Shankar Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Chand Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 03-03-2015 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 420, 406, 468 and 471 of the I.P.C Allegation against the petitioner is that he is working showing his father's name as Naubat Pandey who is his uncle and as a matter of fact name of father of the petitioner is Suba Pandey. Submission is that his uncle Naubat Pandey has no son hence he had adopted the petitioner so in the matriculation certificate his father's name is Naubat Pandey and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration who is suffering in custody since 19.09.2014. In this case charge sheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51266 of 2014 (2) dt.03-03-2015 2/2 prosecution evidence to which the learned A.P.P. does not dispute. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Purnia in Rupauli (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 90 of 2012, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a 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) Abhay/- U T