Munna Marandi @ Dinesh Kumar Dinesh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6051 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -112 Year- 2015 Thana -GURARU District- GAYA ====================================================== Munna Marandi @ Dinesh Kumar Dinesh son of late Ram Anugrah Prasad resident of Mohalla - Diha, P.S. Guraru, District - Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Veena Kumari Jaiswal For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amitesh Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 23-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Guraru P.S. Case No. 112 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

Allegedly, the petitioner was found running Public Distribution System shop in the name of Arjun Bhuiyan who is the servant of the petitioner in the house of Bishundev Prasad. Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner with due permission was helping the Public Distribution System dealer Arjun Bhuiyan in doing the work, no offence as

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6051 of 2016 (2) dt.23-02-2016 2/2 alleged is made out against the petitioner and, as such, the petitioner who is suffering in custody since 30.12.2015, deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned A.P.P. opposes. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the detention of the petitioner, now he is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gaya in connection with Guraru P.S. Case No. 112 of 2015 subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) sushma/- U T