Hare Ram Mahton @ Hare Ram Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18157 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -569 Year- 2016 Thana -KHAGARIA District- KHAGARIA ======================================================

1. Hare Ram Mahton @ Hare Ram Mahto Son of Vijali Mahton Resident of Village Rani Shakarpura, P.S. Gangaur(Khagaria), District- Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Tarun Prasad Mandal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-06-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Khagaria (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 569 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Sections 364, 307, 504 and 34 Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner and other co-accused persons is of abducting the victim.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has no role to play in the alleged abduction of the victim. Moreover, now the victim has been recovered and the victim in his statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., he has not named the petitioner. Further petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been in judicial custody since 22.12.2016. Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence and period of custody,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18157 of 2017 (3) dt.19-06-2017 2/2 let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District & Sessions Judge, Khagaria, in connection with Khagaria (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 569 of 2016, 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) 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.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T