Mantu Yadav @ Mantu Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30606 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No. -80 Year- 2016 Thana -BHAPATIYAHI District- SUPAUL ====================================================== Mantu Yadav @ Mantu Kumar Yadav, son of Jhabru Yadav, Resident of village Navtoliya, Gharari, P.S. Meerganj, District Purnea. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Amar Nath Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party: APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 20-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 19.03.2017 in connection with Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No. 80 of 2016 for the offences alleged under Sections 302, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated as he is not named in the first information report. It is submitted that except suspicion raised on the basis that the call records of the mobile of the deceased showed the petitioner's name, there is no other materials to connect him with the alleged occurrence.

4. Learned APP for the State on the basis of the case diary submits that the call records of the mobile of the deceased showed that the deceased had talked with the petitioner.

5. 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 thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in connection with

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30606 of 2017 (3) dt.20-07-2017 2/2 Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No. 80 of 2016 with 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 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. (iv) The petitioner shall cooperate 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.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Ibrar U T