Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34917/2016bail granted

Raju Kumar @ Raju Kumar Yadav @ Raju Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2016-08-31Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34917 of 2016 (2) dt.31-08-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.34917 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -105 Year- 2015 Thana -MEHANDIA District- JEHANABAD ======================================================

1. RAJU KUMAR @ RAJU KUMAR YADAV @ RAJU YADAV son of Brij Nandan Yadav resident of Village- Sabajpura, Police StationMehandia, district- Arwal .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt Indu Kumari Srivastava ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 31-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected vide order dated 19.01.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 48332 of 2015, on the ground that the informant Soni Kumari has been examined and she has not identified the petitioner present in the dock and as such the petitioner now deserves sympathetic consideration to which learned APP submits that it reveals that the informant has turned hostile on the point of identification only.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the period of detention and further the deposition of the informant, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34917 of 2016 (2) dt.31-08-2016 sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge I, Jehanabad in connection with Mahendia P.S. Case No. 105 of 2015 vide POSCO Tr. No. 22 of 2015, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T