Govind Mishra And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1573 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -93 Year- 2016 Thana -BEUR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Govind Mishra, son of late Shambhu Mishra

2. Mithu Pandey, son of Ramu Pandey Both are resident of Village - Bhavangama, P.S. - Saraiya, District - Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Babita Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 18-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners seek bail in connection with Beur P.S. Case No. 93/2016, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

First Information Report is against two unknown miscreants, with allegation, to have snatched the bag containing cash of Rs. 20,000/- and during investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of the petitioners made in another case they have been remanded in this case.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioners are in custody since 16.09.2016 but they have not been put on T.I.P. Nothing has been recovered from their possession and besides the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1573 of 2017 (2) dt.18-01-2017 2/2 confessional statement made before the police there is no other legal material against them.

Learned A.P.P. submits that they are habitual offenders and they are involved in several cases.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioners, above named, are directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna in connection with Beur P.S. Case No. 93/2016, 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 petitioners shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on their part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rakhi U T