Santosh Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.22773 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -441 Year- 2016 Thana -GANDHIMAIDAN District- PATNA ======================================================
1. Santosh Chaudhary S/o Burak Chaudhary @ Ramashary Chaudhary Resident of Village- Narayanpur, P.S. Hassan Bazaar, Pero, DistrictBhojpur at Ara. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nagmani Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Harendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 04-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 379, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 441/2016, corresponding to S.Tr. No. 177/2017. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. His name transpired during course of investigation.
Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in confessional statement of Amit Kumar, name of the petitioner surfaced in this case. Nothing has been recovered from possession of the petitioner. Further, the petitioner has remained in custody for more than seven months.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22773 of 2017 (3) dt.04-07-2017 2/2 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Having heard both sides, in view of the facts, stated above, 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 the learned Additional Sessions Judge X, Patna in connection with Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 441/2016, corresponding to S.Tr. No. 177/2017, subject to conditions that one of the bailors should be relative of the petitioner and another having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court below with further condition that he will co-operate in disposal of the trial and will make himself available before the court and failure to appear on two consecutive dates without any appropriate reason will be liable for cancellation of his bail.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J.) Rakhi U T