Rupesh Jha @ Golu Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15710 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-230 Year-2018 Thana- DARIYAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Rupesh Jha @ Golu Jha aged about 25 years Son of Ganesh Jha Resident of Village-Rahimapur, P.S.-Bidupur, District-Vaishali ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sandip Shahi, Advocate and Mr.Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr.Md. Mushtaque Alam, Addl Public Prosecutor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was refused by this Court vide order dated 28.8.2019, passed in Cr.Misc.No. 33599 of 2019.

With reference to the report of the trial court dated 18.2.2021 contained in Letter No. 30 dated 18.2.2021, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge has been framed in the case and summon has been issued to the witnesses of the charge sheet. He further submits that subsequently other similarly situated co-accused Ankit Goswami and Deep Sahni have already been allowed regular bail by different co-ordinate benches of this Court vide orders 30.9.2019, passed Cr.Misc.No. 48537 of 2019 and order dated 6.1.2021, passed in Cr.Misc.No.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15710 of 2020(5) dt.24-02-2021 2/2 16932 of 2019. Petitioner is in custody since 28.2.2019. In the facts of the case, prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. Let the petitioner, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate XI, Saran in Dariyapur Police Station Case No. 230 of 2018 on the following conditions:-

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. In view of the specific allegation against the petitioner, his prayer for bail is refused. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T