Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44021/2016bail granted

Manoj Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

2016-11-16Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44021 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -98 Year- 2015 Thana -MUNGER MUFFASIL District- MUNGER ======================================================

1. Manoj Mandal Son of Late Chhatri Mandal Residnt of village- Mai Chain Tola Police Station Muffassil, District Munger. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt Renu Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 16-11-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer for bail which was earlier rejected by order dated 08.03.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 58299 of 2015 on the ground that the petitioner is suffering in custody since 01.06.2015 and up till now no prosecution witness has been examined. As per direction of this Court the trial has not been concluded within six months and the petitioner was given liberty to renew his prayer for bail. The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that as per report of the learned trial court only charges have been framed. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering that in near future the trial is not likely to be

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44021 of 2016 (3) dt.16-11-2016 2/2 concluded and there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence and as such the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge- III, Munger in Sessions Trial No. 95 of 2016 arising out of Mufassil P.S. Case No. 98 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) Abhay/- U T