Sheo Shankar Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.39108 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -66 Year- 2017 Thana -ROHTAS District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================
1. Sheo Shankar Kumar Sah, son of Jokhan Sah @ Jokhu Teli, resident of village- Vajitpur Banjari, P.S.- Rohtas, District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajeev Nayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 2/ 05-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Rohtas P.S. Case No.66 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 341, 448, 323, 325, 504, 354-B and 379/34 Indian Penal Code. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has clean antecedents. Occurrence is said to have taken place on account of putting colour at the time of Holi. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioner, named above, within six
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39108 of 2018 (2) dt.05-07-2018 2/2 weeks from today in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No.66 of 2017, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Dehri, Rohtas, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P. C. with further conditions: (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be liable to cancel his bail bond and (3) if 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.
(Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- U T