Md. Raju @ Bablu @ Punama @ Gujara v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.63170 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -75 Year- 2010 Thana -KOTWALI District- MUNGER ======================================================

1. MD. RAJU @ BABLU @ PUNAMA @ GUJARA Son of Late Md. Salim @ Md Kabiluddin resident of village Murgiachak, Police Station Kotwali, District Munger.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivendra Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Indu Bala Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No.75 of 2010 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-B)A, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. It has been submitted that three accused persons, who were apprehended by police on the spot, have been allowed bail by this Court. The name of this petitioner was disclosed by the apprehended accused. The case of the petitioner stands on similar footing. The petitioner is in custody since 16.01.2015. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the submission.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63170 of 2017 (2) dt.11-01-2018 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer of bail is allowed. The petitioner, named above, is directed to 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 the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Munger in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No.75 of 2010 (S.Tr. No.74 of 2016) , subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court.

(ii) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) If the petitioner is found involved in future in similar type of allegation, the prosecution will have liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) The petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court and on the event of failure on his part to appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail. (Sanjay Kumar, J) Harish/- U