Manish Kumar @ Manish Kumar Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26362 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -27 Year- 2017 Thana -RAGHOPUR District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Manish Kumar @ Manish Kumar Mukhiya Son of Yogendra Mukhiya, Resident of Village- Sadanandpur, Police Station- Bhaptiyahi, DistrictSupaul. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun For the Opposite Party/s : Smt Sangeeta Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 29-06-2017 Heard the parties.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Raghopur P.S.Case No.27/17 registered for offences punishable under Sections 379, 411 & 411/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has been arrested by the police at the spot and on his confessional statement, there is recovery also from the house of other co-accused persons, however, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case and nothing has been recovered from the house of other accused persons and moreover he has clean antecedent. The petitioner has remained in custody for about 4 1⁄2 months.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26362 of 2017 (3) dt.29-06-2017 2/2 Having heard both sides and in view of the fact that the petitioner has clean antecedent and now he has remained in custody for about 4 1⁄2 months, as such, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M., Birpur (Supaul) in connection with Raghopur P.S.Case No.27 of 2017.

With 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 co-operate 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.

(iv) In future, if his active participation is found in similar type of case, his bail bond shall automatically be cancelled.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is allowed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U