Rohit Rai @ Anubhav Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40464 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2020 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== ROHIT RAI @ ANUBHAV RAI S/o- Sri Surendra Kumar Ray Resident of Railway Coloney, Quarter No. -9C/ D, Jhajha, P.O.- Jhajha, District- Jamui. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajendra Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.A.G.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-02-2021 Heard both parties.
The petitioner seeks bail in Jamui P.S. Case No. 77 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, this petitioner is alleged to have cheated Rs. 35,00,000/- from the informant on the pretext of providing him service in NTPC. It is further alleged that petitioner had taken Rs. 16,27,500/- in 14 different accounts on different dates and cash of Rs. 18,72,500/-. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is not an account holder of IDBI Bank. Chargesheet has already been submitted. Petitioner is in custody since 05.02.2020 having clean antecedent, as stated in para 3 of the petition.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40464 of 2020(2) dt.08-02-2021 2/2 Keeping in view the period of custody of petitioner and having clean antecedent, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 77 of 2020, subject to following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the court below.
(ii) If the petitioner tampers 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 petitioner. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T