Patna High CourtCR. MISC./50979/2018bail granted

Pullur Singh@Pulur Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2018-09-04Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50979 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -181 Year- 2018 Thana -BARBIGHA District- SEKHPURA ======================================================

1. Pullur Singh @ Pulur Kumar, Son of Skaldev Singh, resident of VillageSindai, Police Station- Barbigha, District- Shiekhpura. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. B.Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Amit Kumar Rakesh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 04-09-2018 Heard the parties.

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in Barbigha (Mission O.P.) P.S.Case No.181 of 2018 registered for the offence under Section 386 of Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner is of demanding extortion money from the vehicle.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the petitioner is an owner of Hotel at the place of occurrence, allegation of extortion of money from any vehicle is ornamental. He further submits that the motor cycle of the petitioner was parked near the hotel of the petitioner from where the said motor cycle was seized by the police. As such the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50979 of 2018 (2) dt.04-09-2018 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpur, in Barbigha P.S.Case No.181 of 2018 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C. and (1) one of the bailors must be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned court. (ii) the petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence and the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation of the case and make himself available as and when required by the police, otherwise, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bond.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) AnilKrSinha/- U