Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6495/2017bail granted

Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kr. Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2017-02-10Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6495 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -78 Year- 2016 Thana -BHAPATIYAHI District- SUPAUL ====================================================== Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kr. Sah, son of Brahmadeo Sah, resident of VillagePipra Khurd, Ward No. 01, P.S. Bhapatiyahi, District- Supaul. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 10-02-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 19.12.2016 in connection with Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No. 78 of 2016 for the offences alleged under Sections 363, 366(A) and 511/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and in fact so-called victim girl was never kidnapped. The averment in the F.I.R. that the petitioner was caught and handed over to the police is belied from the very fact that the petitioner has also filed Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No. 79 of 2016 immediately after the present case was instituted. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6495 of 2017 (2) dt.10-02-2017 2/2 released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul, in connection with Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No. 78 of 2016, on the following conditions:- (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iv) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/- U T