Pintu Kumar @ Bhoma v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.57697 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -135 Year- 2018 Thana -DELHA District- GAYA ====================================================== Pintu Kumar @ Bhoma, Son of Late Rajendra Prasad, resident of MohallaUndar Bairagi, Police Station- Delha, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The South Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd. through its Managing Director, Bihar, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No-2, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anish Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Delha P.S. Case No. 135/2018, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 386, 427, 447, 307, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, section 27 of the Arms Act and section 139 of Electricity Act.

Informant alleged that petitioner and other co-accused came at his Darwaja and demanded extortion of Rs. One lakh and misbehaved with his girl. They damaged the door, window, electric meter etc. and also fired from pistol upon his girl, but somehow she escaped.

It has been submitted that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. In fact, while the petitioner was going on road Informant threw water upon him, as a result, altercation took place between them and the present case is result of the said dispute.

Petitioner is in custody since 01.06.2018.

Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to 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 Special Judge (Electricity), Magadh Area, Gaya in connection with Delha P.S. Case No. 135/2018, subject to the conditions:

(1.) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2.) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bonds.

(3.) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence

or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) Vinita/- U T