Roshan Murmu @ Talo Murmu @ Raush Murmu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1927 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-353 Year-2014 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka ====================================================== ROSHAN MURMU @ TALO MURMU @ RAUSH MURMU Son of Late Lal Murmu Resident of Village - Dudhghatiya, P.S.- Fullidumar, Distt.- Banka.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Md. Nurul Hoda, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Sadanand Paswan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-07-2021 Let the defect (s) be removed within four weeks after start of the physical Court.

Heard the parties in virtual Court.

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated 22.01.2021 in G.R.No.2438 of 2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Banka, in connection with Amarpur P.S.Case No.353 of 2014, registered under Sections 302,201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The FIR is against unknown. Name of the appellant

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1927 of 2021(2) dt.13-07-2021 2/2 surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused-Munna Murmu, who has already been allowed bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order at Annexure-2. Appellant has got no criminal antecedent. Investigation of the case is already complete.

Let the appellant, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court-below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, with condition that both bailors shall be resident of territorial jurisdiction of the learned court below and further the appellant shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case and also the appellant shall not leave the country without permission of the learned Trial Court, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the appellant.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Nitesh/- U T