Govind Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17937 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -153 Year- 2016 Thana -PANDAUL District- MADHUBANI ====================================================== Govind Chaudhary, Son of Mahendra Chaudhary, Resident of VillageUdaypur Bithuar, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Satish Chandra Jha-3, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sri Prem Kumar Jha (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 19-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Pandaul P.S Case No. 153 of 2016 (G.R. No. 1488 of 2016) registered for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act Allegedly, the dead body of brother of the informant was found from his jewelry shop. It transpires that unknown criminals killed his brother and mobile of his brother was also missing. It is further alleged that Baiju Jha has taken Rs. 3,00000/- from the brother of the informant for selling a piece of land, but did not execute the sale deed.

Submission is of false implication and that there is no material against the petitioner to show his involvement in this

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17937 of 2017 (4) dt.19-05-2017 2/2 case, the name of the petitioner at first transpires in the confessional statement of Kundan Kumar Sahni and thereafter the police took the signature on the blank paper and the same was turned into the confessional statement. Save and except the confession made before the police, the petitioner is in custody since 20.11.2016, co accused Kundan Kumar Sahni and Sunil Kumar Mandal have been allowed bail and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

Learned A.P.P. does not dispute the aforesaid facts. 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 like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani, in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 153 of 2016, 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) Rajiv/- U T