Santosh Thakur @ Karu Thakur v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.4291 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -193 Year- 2016 Thana -MUNGER MUFFASIL District- MUNGER ======================================================
1. Santosh Thakur @ Karu Thakur, Son of Shankar Thakur, Resident of Mohalla- Rampur Bhikhari, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Munger. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ambrish Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Arbind Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 13-02-2017 The petitioner is in custody since 20.09.2016 in connection with Munger Muffasil P.S. Case No. 193 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Sections 28(1-b)a/26(ii) of the Indian Penal Code.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though there is alleged recovery of one pistol from the possession of the petitioner, however, he has been sufficiently punished for the said offence as he has been in judicial custody since 20.09.2016 and he has no criminal antecedent. Heard learned A.P.P. also.
Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, of the case, nature of offence and the period of custody and also that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4291 of 2017 (2) dt.13-02-2017 2/2 Magistrate, Munger, in connection with Munger Muffassil P.S. Case No. 193 of 2016, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court and on the event of failure on his part to appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail.
It is also made clear that if the petitioner again found involved in any of the such offence, in future, his bail bonds will be cancelled.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U