Subodh Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19457 of 2020 ====================================================== Subodh Pandit, Son of Late Ramagya Pandit @ Ramadnya Pandit, resident of Village - Paharpur, P.S.- Jurawanpur, District - Vaishali at Hajipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jeetendra Narayan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal The proceeding of the court are being conduct through Video Conferencing and the Advocates joined the proceeding through Video Conferencing from their residence CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-07-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 28 of 2018, arising out of Sonepur Rail P.S. Case No. 165 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under sections 80, 20 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

Earlier the bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 13.02.2019 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 5951 of 2019.

Allegation is recovery of 20.200 Kg. of Ganja from possession of three accused.

It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner is in custody since 29.10.2018 and similarly placed co-accused Kamlesh Mahto and Umesh Mahto have been enlarged on bail

by this Court.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount in connection with N.D.P.S. Case 28 of 2018, arising out of Sonepur Rail P.S. Case 165 of 2018 to the satisfaction of learned court below where the case is pending, subject to 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and valid reason, the trial court shall have liberty to cancel his bail bonds.

(2) 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.

(3) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail the trial court shall take steps to cancel his bail bonds.

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