Birendra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.53440 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -539 Year- 2015 Thana -BETTIAH TOWN DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Birendra Prasad son of Ramnath Mahto, resident of village- Ranaha, P.S.- Shrinagar (Pujahan), District- West Champaran .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra For the Opposite Party : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 27-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 539 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 489 (B), 489 (C)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, acting on a tip off, raid was conducted and when one person started giving note to another, both were caught and on search from possession of the petitioner 40 pieces of fake currency note of 500 denomination were recovered. Submission is of false implication and that no offence under Section 489 (B) IPC is made out, and 489 (C) is bailable in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53440 of 2015 (5) dt.27-01-2016 2/2 nature and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration as he has been made victim of the circumstances. Learned A.P.P. submits that the petitioner is in custody since 16.08.2015 and charge-sheet has already been submitted.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner is 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 the Learned C.J.M., Bettiah, West Champaran, in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 539 of 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 privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) siddharth/- U T