Ram Nath Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44300 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-404 Year-2012 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== RAM NATH PRASAD S/o Late Satyanarain Prasad @ Late Satyanarain Raut R/o village- Murtiya, P.S.- Adapur, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

Ram Pravesh Prasad son of Jaymangal Prasad Resident of Village- Fulwar, Police Station Lakhaura, District- East Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dilip Kumar Tondon, Advocate For the informant :

Mr. Anang Mohan Sinha, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Akhileshwar Dayal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 22-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the informant and the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Complaint Case No. 404 of 2012, (Trial No. 1075 of 2019), instituted for the offence under Section(s) 420, 468, 469 and 120B of Indian Penal Code. Counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon'ble Court in Cr. Misc. 23217 of 2015 with direction that the affidavit shall be filed by the petitioner stating that he is not accused in any other case. The petitioner had filed affidavit and was released on anticipatory bail. Later on, the complainant filed photocopy of First Information Report of Raxaul P.S. Case No. 66 of 2013 in the court below and, thereafter, the bail bonds of the petitioner was cancelled.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44300 of 2019(2) dt.22-07-2019 2/2 Counsel for the petitioner submits that inadvertently, he has missed to state about aforesaid case in his anticipatory bail petition as he was not properly informed by the client. He submits that he has mentioned in the instant bail petition about pendency of the aforesaid Criminal case.

Petitioner is in custody since 22.4.2019.

This Court finds that petitioner has sufficiently been punished for laches on his part.

Counsel for the informant has appeared and opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail is allowed. Let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Shri T.K. Prasad, learned Judicial Magistrate, Sikrahna at Dhaka, East Champaran, in connection with Complaint Case No. 404 of 2012, (Trial No. 1075 of 2019), subject to the condition that both the bailors will be close relatives of the petitioner.

(Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T