Pramod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1012 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -24 Year- 2016 Thana -MAIN P.S. District- GAYA ====================================================== Pramod Kumar, Son of Ramchandra Das, Resident of village - Ismail Balwa Par Police Station Tekari, District - Gaya .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 02-03-2017 Heard the parties.

This application has been filed in connection with Main P.S.Case No.24 of 2016 for the offence under Sections 387/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 25 (1-b)A/26/35 of the Arms At and 17 of the C.L.A. Act.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is that three country-made Pistols have been recovered from the bag of the petitioner and he is in custody for more than eight months as well as he has no criminal antecedent. Heard learned A.P.P. also.

In this regard, a report was called for from the Sr.S.P., Gaya, who has also submitted a report that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1012 of 2017 (3) dt.02-03-2017 2/2 Having heard both sides. Considering the aforesaid facts and also considering the fact that he is in custody for more than eight months, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Gaya in connection with Main P.S.Case No.24 of 2016. With 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 co-operate 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.

(iv) If the petitioner is found indulged in such type of cases in future, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is allowed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U