Rakesh Raman v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.60735 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -377 Year- 2017 Thana -BARAUNI District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Rakesh Raman, son of Jai Jai Ram Singh, resident of Village- Sinarua, P.S.- Barauni, District- Begusarai.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Barauni (Garhara) Police Station Case No. 377 of 2017 registered for the offences under sections 25 (1-b)A, 26, 35 of the Arms Act. It is alleged that the informant, who happens to be Police Officer, seized 07 live cartridges from possession of the petitioner. The petitioner denies the allegation of any recovery from his possession. He is in custody since 05.10.2017 having clean antecedent except one more case bearing Barauni (Chakia) P.S. Case No. 182 of 014 registered for the offence under section 379/34 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code in which he is on bail.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.60735 of 2017 (2) dt.20-12-2017 2/2 Considering the nature of allegation, facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer of bail is allowed and the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in connection with Barauni (Garhara) Police Station Case No. 377 of 2017, 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) The petitioner shall cooperate 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 involved in similar type of offence in future, the prosecution will have liberty to move for cancellation of his bail. (Sanjay Kumar, J) Mahesh/- U T