Md. Sultan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47457 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -352 Year- 2017 Thana -SUPAUL District- SUPAUL ====================================================== Md. Sultan, Son of Noor Mohammad, resident of Ward No. 18, Nagar Parishad Supaul, Police Station & District - Supaul. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun, Advocate For the Opposite Party: APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 18-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 21.06.2017 in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 352 of 2017 for the offences alleged under Sections 153A, 295A, 298, 429 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 11 of the Animal Cruelty Act.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and even according to the inspection report dated 20.06.2017 issued by the Veterinary Surgeon, Supaul (Annexure-2), final report of tongue and meat is required to be done at the Forensic Laboratory. It is therefore submitted that the nature of the meat was not determined. It is further submitted that charge sheet has already been submitted in this case, hence there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

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/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 352 of 2017, on the following

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47457 of 2017 (2) dt.18-10-2017 2/2 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/Chandran U T