Madho Bhagat v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.33432 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -129 Year- 2016 Thana -SAKRA District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Madho Bhagat, Son of Firozan Bhagat @ Prajan Bhagat, Resident of Village- Sarmastpur, P.S. Sakra, District Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate For the Opposite Party: APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 24-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act registered in connection with Sakra P.S. Case No. 129 of 2016.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated merely on the basis of confessional statement of coaccused Arvind Kumar who stated that the petitioner was the owner of the land in question which is said to be one Kashi Chaudhary. Petitioner has specifically denied any concern with him.

4. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, as such, in the event of the arrest or surrender of petitioner 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 bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, (East) Muzaffarpur in connection with Sakra P.S. Case No. 129 of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33432 of 2016 (2) dt.24-08-2016 2/2 2016, 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) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation 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. (iii) The petitioner shall remain physically present 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