Mintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.24088 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -57 Year- 2011 Thana -CIVIL LINE District- GAYA ====================================================== Mintu Kumar, son of Vijay Prasad, resident of Mohalla- Bahuar Chaura, P.S.- Vishnupad, District- Gaya.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Murlidhar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner, who is in custody since 12.02.2018, seeks bail in connection with Civil Line P.S. Case No.57 of 2011 registered for the offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
It has been submitted that the case was registered against unknown miscreants. In course of investigation, one Raushan Kumar @ Priti Rawani was apprehended who disclosed the name of this petitioner. The said accused along with other accused persons were put on trial but due to lack of evidence, they were acquitted by learned Additional Sessions Judge IV, Gaya on 29.06.2016 in Sessions Trial No.145 of 2012. The other coaccused having similar allegation, whose trial was split up, has
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24088 of 2018 (3) dt.18-05-2018 been allowed bail on 03.05.2018 in Cr.Misc.No.14565 of 2018. The petitioner has clean antecedent.
The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the submission. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for bail is allowed and the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the likewise amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Civil Line P.S. Case No.57 of 2011, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall 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.
(iii) If the petitioner is found involved in future in similar type of allegation, the prosecution will have liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(iv) The petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court and on the event of failure on his part to appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail.
(Sanjay Kumar, J) Harish/- U