Raghu Rai @ Ragho Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.12163 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -171 Year- 2017 Thana -SHEOHAR District- SHEOHAR ====================================================== Raghu Rai @ Ragho Rai, son of Raj Mangal Rai, Resident of VillageHansaur, P.S.- Belsand, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Hans Lal Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party: Mr. J.K. Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 22-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody since 12.10.2017 in connection with Sheohar P.S. Case No. 171 of 2017 for the offences alleged under Sections 419, 420, 468 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated merely on the confessional statement of co-accused Moti Kumar with whom he had some dispute with regard to payment of wages. It is submitted that the petitioner has no concern whatsoever with the owner of mobile no. 7044976475 from which the demand for Rs. 10,00,000/- was made nor the holder of account no. 1681101011429, namely, Rajeev Ranjan in which the said amount was paid. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner nor test identification parade has been conducted for his identification. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.
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/-
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12163 of 2018 (2) dt.22-03-2018 2/2 (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned I/c Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheohar, in connection with Sheohar P.S. Case No. 171 of 2017, 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 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/- U T