Gopi Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47291 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -74 Year- 2017 Thana -SHAKURABAD District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== Gopi Kumar Son of Raj Kumar Sharma, R/o Village- Ghejan, P.S.- Sakurabad, District- Jehanabad.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 17-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 04.07.2017 in connection with Sakurabad P.S. Case No. 74 of 2017 for the offences alleged under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and except the self confession extracted from the petitioner, there is no other material to connect him with the alleged offence. The recovery of the looted money in a black bag has not been made from the conscious possession of the petitioner, rather it has been recovered buried under one feet of sand about 100 yards away from the Rupaspur bridge.

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 satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad, in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47291 of 2017 (3) dt.17-10-2017 connection with Sakurabad P.S. Case No. 74 of 2017, 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/Chandran U T