Guddu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.52380 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -86 Year- 2016 Thana -PAKRIDAYAL DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Guddu Kumar, son of Mosafir Sah, resident of Village- Pakarideyal, P.S.- Pakarideyal, District- East Champaran.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Atul Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 16-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Petitioner is languishing in custody since 12.07.2016 in connection with Pakarideyal P.S. Case No. 86/16 for offences punishable under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, is that he got a ransom call for depositing Rs. 5 lakhs by a particular mobile number.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is not named in the First Information Report, no overt act has been committed by him and he has no criminal history. It is submitted that the mobile number stated by the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52380 of 2016 (2) dt.16-12-2016 2/2 informant does not belong to him and that charge-sheet has already been submitted, hence, there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence.
However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
Be that as it may, since charge-sheet has already been submitted, let petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Sikrahana at Dhaka, East Champaran, in connection with Pakarideyal P.S. Case No. 86/16. This direction of bail is, however, subject to the condition that one of the bailors should be the close relative of the petitioner and the other bailor should have sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned police station/ court and that the petitioner will appear before the learned court below on each and every date and failure to appear on two consecutive dates without assigning any reason will entail cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajesh/- U T