Raju Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55517 of 2015 (3) dt.01-03-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55517 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -104 Year- 2014 Thana -NOKHA District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Raju Singh S/o- Binde Singh R/o Village- Hathini, P.s Nokha, District Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashutosh Tripathy For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 01-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nokha P.S. Case No. 104 of 2014 registered for the offence punishable under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, ransom of Rs. 5,00,000/- was demanded from the staff of the informant who were engaged in repairing work of Baraw-Dinara road and one miscreant stated his name Raju Singh (petitioner) and again they came and demanded ransom, thereafter the informant and others went at the house of the petitioner where they came to know that earlier the petitioner had killed one Sardar, owner of harvester but was acquitted. Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner is in custody since 25.06.2015 but he has not been put

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55517 of 2015 (3) dt.01-03-2016 on TIP, it appears that someone has stated the name of the petitioner, the petitioner has got no concern with other co-accused, without any legal and cogent material, the petitioner is suffering in custody and, as such, he deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. submits that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that no ransom amount was paid and further the petitioner has not been put on TIP and, as such, the petitioner, above named, 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 C.J.M., Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Nokha P.S. Case No. 104 of 2014 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