Ravi Paswan And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.66349 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2018 Thana- DEO District- Aurangabad ======================================================
1. Ravi Paswan Son of Rajesh Paswan
2. Jitendra Kumar Son of Rama Prajapat Both Resident of VillageBarha, P.S. Chhakadbandha,District- Gaya(Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Leelawati Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sri Satyendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioners, who are in custody, seek bail in connection with Deo P.S. Case No. 100 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 399, 402, 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 (1-b) a, 26, 35 of Arms Act. Allegation against petitioner No. 1 is of recovery of one knife and one motorcycle and petitioner No. 2 is of one iron dab.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case only on suspicion. Nothing has been recovered from their possession. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent and they are
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.66349 of 2018(3) dt.02-11-2018 2/2 in custody since 24.05.2018.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Aurangabad, in connection with Deo P.S. Case No. 100 of 2018 subject to the conditions that:-
(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.
(2) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be represented on each and every date fixed by the court.
(3) If the petitioners 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 petitioners.
(S. Kumar, J) veena/- U T