Mukesh Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.16598 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -172 Year- 2016 Thana -SARAI RANJAN District- SAMASTIPUR ====================================================== Mukesh Sahni, Son of Ram Lakshan Sahni, Resident of Village Larua, Police Station Tajpur (Halai), District Samastipur .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Choudhary Shyam Nandan, Advocate For the Opposite Party: APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 04-04-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 05.12.2016 in connection with Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 172 of 2016 for the alleged offences under Section 392 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated as the petitioner is not named in the first information report. His name has surfaced on the confessional statement of coaccused Deepak Kumar, who has been arrested in connection with recovery of two motorcycles from his possession. Similarly situated co-accused Ajay Kumar Sahani @ Ajay Sahani @ Ajay Kumar has been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 49620 of 2016.

4. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in connection with Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 172 of 2016 on the following conditions: - (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16598 of 2017 (2) dt.04-04-2017 2/2 petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iv) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran U T