Md. Mosim v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15647 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -28 Year- 2005 Thana -BALUA BAZAR District- SUPAUL ====================================================== Md. Mosim Son of Late Chhedi Miyan, Resident of Village- Chapin, P.S.- Bhimpur, District Supaul. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 26-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Balua Bazar (Supaul) P.S. Case No. 28 of 2005, G.R. No. 904 of 2005 registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner was on bail but on his behalf no pairvi was done on 19.12.2015 and 16.02.2016, resulting, non-bailable warrant of arrest and processes under Sections 82, 83 Cr.P.C. were issued.

Submission is that the petitioner is ready to cooperate during trial. He will not misuse the privilege of bail in future. The bail bond of the petitioner was not cancelled without cancelling his bail bond, non-bailable warrant of arrest and process were issued. The petitioner undertakes to remain vigilant in future and,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15647 of 2017 (2) dt.26-04-2017 2/2 as such, he deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. submits that this is a case of the year 2005.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering that the petitioner is in custody since 28.02.2017 and now he has been sufficiently penalized, the petitioner above named 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 Additional District JudgeIII, Supaul in connection with Balua P.S. Case No. 28 of 2005/G.R. No. 904 of 2005, 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) Vats/- U T