Satyam Singh @ Satyam Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.40749 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -26 Year- 2018 Thana -BANGAON District- SAHARSA ====================================================== Satyam Singh @ Satyam Kumar, Son of Dinesh Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Punhad, Police Station- Ghanshyampur, District- Darbhanga. At present Village- Bhotiya, Police Station- Simri Bakhtiyarpur (Balwahat O.P.), District- Saharsa.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satish Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh -5, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Bangaon P.S. Case No. 26/2018, registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant has alleged that four unknown persons looted his cash and other belongings while he was coming on motorcycle. It has been submitted that Informant in his re-statement has named the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He has falsely been implicated in this case due to business rivalry. He is in custody since 03.04.2018.

Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner above-

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40749 of 2018 (3) dt.20-09-2018 2/2 named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in connection with Bangaon P.S. Case No. 26/2018, subject to the conditions:

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

(2.) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bonds.

(3.) If the petitioner tampers 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 petitioner.

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