Vivek Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29019 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2022 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Vivek Kumar, Son Of Jitendra Ram Resident Of Village-Madhu Chhapra, PsPipra Kothi, Dist-East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Priyesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected by order dated 03.02.2023 in Cr. Misc. No.29408 of 2022 with a liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charges against the petitioner has been framed on 06.04.2023. The learned Additional P. P. opposes the bail application and submits that no documentary evidence is on record to show that the charges have been framed against the petitioner on 06.04.2023.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner, above-named, within a period of six weeks from today,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29019 of 2023(2) dt.10-05-2023 2/2 is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Pipra Kothi P. S. Case No.48 of 2022, subject to the condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his father namely, Jitendra Ram. Further, the learned trial Court before accepting the bail bonds shall verify whether charges against the petitioner have been framed or not by order dated 06.04.2023. In the event, if it is found that charges have not been framed against the petitioner, then the present order shall not be acted upon.

Further, in the event, if the bail bonds are accepted based on the fact that charges have been framed and thereafter the learned trial Court comes to a conclusion that petitioner after his release is trying to delay the trial in any manner, the learned trial Court shall be at liberty to forthwith cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after recording reasons.

The application stands disposed of.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T