Md. Azam Mansoori v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.59109 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2018 Thana- KHAJANCHI HAT District- Purnia ====================================================== Md. Azam Mansoori, Son of Md. Jamil Mansoori, Resident of VillageMadhopura Line Bazar, P.S. K. Hat, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sarveshwar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Nand Kishore Pd ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with K. Hat (Sahayak) P.S. Case No. 103 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 456 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against petitioner is of committing theft in the rented house of the informant. Name of the petitioner has surfaced in this case on the basis of secret information and theft articles have been recovered from his house. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Considering the nature of allegation against petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly the prayer for bail is rejected at this stage.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.59109 of 2018(2) dt.09-10-2018 2/2 However, after six months of custody, petitioner shall be enlarged on bail by the court below on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in connection with K. Hat (Sahayak) P.S. Case No. 103 of 2018 with 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 valid reason trial court shall have liberty to cancel his bail bond.

(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) Rajiv/ManojU T