Sintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.22831 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -159 Year- 2016 Thana -KAKO District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== Sintu Kumar Son of Satyendra Yadav, R/o Village- Ramdani, P.S.- Kako, District- Jehanabad.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Indrajeet Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 19-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 30.03.2017 in connection with Kako P.S. Case No. 159 of 2016 (GR No. 1651 of 2016) for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with a dispute of family members. There is case and counter case between the parties and injuries have been sustained on both sides. The assault attributed to the petitioner of making a blow on the head of his uncle (informant) with rod, but however, the informant appears to have sustained only simple injury and does not appears to have been treated at P.M.C.H., as evident from the report of the Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad which was called for by the Court.

4. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22831 of 2017 (5) dt.19-08-2017 thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Jehanabad in connection with Kako P.S. Case No. 159 of 2016 (GR No. 1651 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) That the petitioner shall co-operate 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) Chandran/BT U T