Rajesh Kumar Mahto And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47474 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -168 Year- 2017 Thana -TAJPUR District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================

1. Rajesh Kumar Mahto

2. Chandra Devi .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ashok Kumar Singh 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 16-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners apprehend arrest in Tajpur P.S. Case No. 168 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Sections-307, 379, 385 & other minor Sections of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted that petitioners have no criminal antecedent. There is general allegation against the petitioner that they took away nose pin of the informant.

In such circumstances, prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioners named above in the event of their arrest or surrender in the court below within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with in Tajpur P.S. Case No. 168 of 2017 to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur subject to condition as laid down u/S 438(2) of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47474 of 2017 (2) dt.16-10-2017 2/2 the Cr.P.C. with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason, will automatically cancel bail bond of the petitioner and (3) if 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.

(Sanjay Priya, J) A.K.V./- U T