Hanuman Mahto @ Hanuman Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55956 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -77 Year- 2016 Thana -LAUKAHA District- MADHUBANI ======================================================

1. Hanuman Mahto @ Hanuman Mehta S/o Ramsevak Mahto, R/o Vill.- Nirmali, P.S.- Nirmali, District- Supaul.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sernior Advocate Mr. Jitendra kumar Bharti, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ahtash Ali Khan, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 01-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No. 77 of 2016, G.R. No. 1037 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R. is that the some miscreants intercepted the motorcycle of the informant and snatched his motorcycle as well as cattle feed and fled away. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and the petitioner is not named in F.I.R. and on the confessional statement of other co-accused persons, the petitioner has been dragged in this case. It is also submitted that nothing has been

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55956 of 2018 (3) dt.31-10-2018 2/2 recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he is in custody since 21.02.2018.

Heard learned A.P.P also.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani in connection with Laukaha P.S.Case No. 77 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 1037 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) It is made clear that if petitioner found involved in any of the like offences, in future, prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T