Pappu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.41422 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -147 Year- 2015 Thana -SANGRAMPUR District- MUNGER ====================================================== Pappu Yadav, son of Prakash Yadav, resident of Village- Ajgarhwa, P.S.- Belhar, District- Banka.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Indu Bhushan, Advocate For the Opposite Party: APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 03-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody since 05.02.2015 in connection with Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 147 of 2015 for the offences alleged under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated only on the confessional statement of co-accused Bablu Mehtar from whose possession mobile phones have been recovered. No recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner and there is no material to connect him with the alleged occurrence. It is submitted that the petitioner is on bail in all the cases in respect of which he has been made accused.
4. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-2nd, Munger in connection with Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 147 of 2015 with the following conditions:
(i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41422 of 2016 (2) dt.03-10-2016 2/2 petitioner.
(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.
(iii) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Ibrar U T