Nand Kumar Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23938 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-812 Year-2017 Thana- FORBESGANJ DistrictAraria ====================================================== NAND KUMAR MEHTA, aged about 40 years, male, Son of Late Ramashish Mehta Resident of Village-Pachiyari Jhirua, P.S-Simraha, District-Araria. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party:

Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 17-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Forbesganj (Simraha) P.S. Case No. 812 of 2017.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the backdrop of land dispute and there is case and counter case between the parties. The accusation of assault is general and omnibus without any specific assault attributed to the petitioner. The injuries are simple in nature. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioner's arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioner 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23938 of 2019(2) dt.17-04-2019 2/2 connection with Forbesganj (Simraha) P.S. Case No. 812 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C., and also subject to the following further conditions - (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) That the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) 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) Ibrar//- U T