Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1534/2017bail granted

Amlesh Rai v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-01-17Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1534 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -353 Year- 2013 Thana -SITAMARHI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Amlesh Rai, Son of Nathuni Rai, Resident of Village- Chakki, P.S.- Sonbarsa, Distt- Sitamarhi.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Ramjee Rai, S/o Devi Rai, resident of Village- Jahadi, P.s.- Sonbarsa, Distt- Sitamarhi.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Virendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nand Kishore Pd ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 17-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Case No. C1-353/2013, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is named in the First Information Report but after investigation final form was submitted and on protest petition cognizance has been taken against the petitioner and others. Further it has been submitted that no overt act has been committed by the petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1534 of 2017 (2) dt.17-01-2017 2/2 Learned A.P.P. fairly submits that final form was submitted against the petitioner but on protest petition cognizance has been taken.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Case No. C1-353/2013, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be 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.) Rakhi U T