Patna High CourtCR. MISC./60305/2018bail granted

Saheb v. The State Of Bihar

2018-10-11Mr. Justice S. Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.60305 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-338 Year-2017 Thana- BARHARA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Saheb S/o Mohammad Mokim resident of Mohala Ara Nawada, P.S. Nawada, District Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Indra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Barahara P.S. Case No. 338 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code.

FIR was lodged against six unknown persons. Name of petitioner has surfaced in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Krishna Kumar, but he has not stated participation of petitioner in the alleged occurrence, except confession there is nothing against petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he has surrendered in the court below on 09.07.2018 since then he is in custody. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.60305 of 2018(2) dt.11-10-2018 2/2 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, Bhojpur, Ara, in connection with Barahara P.S. Case No. 338 of 2017subject to the conditions that:-

(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 sufficient reason the trial court will be at 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) veena/- U T