Santosh Kumar Mahto And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.5661 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -67 Year- 2017 Thana -BHAIRABASHTHAN District- MADHUBANI ======================================================

1. Santosh Kumar Mahto Son of Mahendra Mahto,

2. Shushil Kumar Sah Son of Ramu Sah,

3. Sunil Kumar Son of Damodar Mahto, Resident of Village-Sarisaw Pahi, P.S.-Pandaul, District-Madhubani.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ram Anurag Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 02-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners are in custody since 08.07.2017 in connection with Bhairab Asthan P.S. Case No. 67 of 2017 for the offence registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither the petitioners has been named in the first information report nor has any recovery from their possession. It is further submitted that the name of the petitioner has been brought in on the basis of the confessional statement made before the police by one Raushan Kumar. Till date no T.I. parade has been held.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M.-I, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani in connection with Bhairab Asthan P.S. Case No. 67 of 2017, subject to the following conditions:-

(1) One of the bailors will be his own blood relative, namely, father, mother, brother, sister and/or his wife.

(2) The petitioner shall not indulge himself in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(3) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of his failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(4) 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.

(Anjana Mishra, J) Jagdish/- U T