Sarfaraj @ Mithun v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40906 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-495 Year-2018 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria ====================================================== 1.

SARFARAJ @ MITHUN, aged about 29 yars (M), Son of Md. Ajimuddin 2.

Imran @ Md. Imran, aged about 30 years (M), Son of Late Fida Hussain @ Fuddi @ Fida Huseen Both are resident of Village- Mohaniya Ward no.02, Police Station- Palasi, District- Araria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar Rana For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Indra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioners seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Earlier, the bail application of the petitioners was rejected vide Annexure-1, giving a liberty to renew their prayer after nine months in jail custody.

It has been submitted that the petitioners are in custody since 02.09.2018.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40906 of 2019(2) dt.24-07-2019 2/2 of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below where the case is pending in connection with Araria (Bairgachhi) P.S. Case No. 495 of 2018, with following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the court below.

(3) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners.

(S. Kumar, J) Sanjay/- U T