Raj Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.56070 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -45 Year- 2018 Thana -NTPC District- BHAGALPUR ======================================================

1. Raj Gupta, son of Bhola, resident of Village- Kalgiganj, P.S. Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyam Kishor Das, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 08-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Kahalgaon N.T.P.C. P.S.Case No. 45of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Sections 216 (A), 353, 401, 413, 414, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation as per F.I.R. against the petitioner along with others is of robbery of the articles and tried to get money released from police station, which was recovered from the house of one accused, Santosh Kumar Sah.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he is in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56070 of 2018 (2) dt.08-10-2018 2/2 custody since 26.06.2018 without any cogent material. Heard learned A.P.P also.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur in connection with Kahalgaon N.T.P.C. P. S. Case No. 45 of 2018, 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) It is made clear that if petitioner found involved in any of the like offences, in future, prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T