Mukesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.77086 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-445 Year-2018 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar, son of Vijendra Yadav, Resident of Village- Jitwarpur, P.S.- Samastipur, Muffasil, District- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pushpendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Anish Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in Patliputra P.S. Case No. 445 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against petitioner is of appearing in RRB Group-D Examination in place of other candidate. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case on suspicion. He himself is an examinee and had not appeared for anyone. He has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 28.09.2018.

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/- with two sureties of the like

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.77086 of 2018(2) dt.21-12-2018 2/2 amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Judge-XII cum Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna in connection with Patliputra P.S. Case No. 445 of 2018 with following conditions:- (1)Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court below.

(3) If the petitioner 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 petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) ranjan/manojU T