Dinesh Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.33178 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No. -76 Year- 2016 Thana -CHANDMUNDI District- JAMUI ====================================================== Dinesh Ram Son of Late Bindeshwari Ram, Resident of Village- Khaira, P.S.- Khaira, District- Jamui.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Umesh Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party: Mr. Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 20-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 06.10.2016 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 71 of 2017 arising out of Chandramandih P.S. Case No. 76 of 2016 for the offences alleged under Sections 302/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated as he is not named in the first information report. The names of the petitioner and one Rohit Singh have surfaced on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused Ranjit Tanti, the latter having been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 8476 of 2017. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

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 District and Sessions Judge, Jamui in connection with Sessions Trial No. 71 of 2017 arising out of Chandramandih P.S. Case No. 76 of 2016 with the following conditions: (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33178 of 2017 (2) dt.20-07-2017 2/2 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) B.T/Ibrar U T