Ijhar Alam @ Izar Alam @ Majanu @ Majanu Miyan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.31880 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -906 Year- 2016 Thana -HAJIPUR District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Ijhar Alam @ Izar Alam @ Majanu @ Majanu Miyan, Son of Late Kamru Jama, Resident of Mohalla- Bagdulhan, Ward No. 24, P.S.- Town Hajipur, District- Vaishali.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vasant Vikas, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 13-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody since 16.03.2017 in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 906 of 2016 for the offences alleged under Sections 420, 406, 467, 471, 472 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the thrust of allegation is against Dinanath Singh who is said to be the owner of the land in question. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. This case stands on better footing than F.I.R. named accused Bijay Kumar who has been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 27874 of 2017. Similarly situated co-accused Arun Kumar has also been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 22247 of 2017. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.
4. Be that as it may, 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
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31880 of 2017 (2) dt.13-07-2017 2/2 satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 906 of 2016, on the following conditions:- (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.
(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial. (iii) 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.
(iv) 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.
(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/- U T