Raushan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.43832 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -240 Year- 2017 Thana -MAHUA District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================
1. Raushan Kumar, son of Vakil Ray, resident of village- Manpura, P.S.- Mahua, District- Vaishali.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vasant Vikas, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 3/ 01-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Mahua P.S. Case No.240 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 307 and other allied sections of Indian Penal Code and Section 5 and 6 of Essential Services Maintenance Act.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is named in the written report only as a member of unlawful assembly.
In the written report, there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioner, named above, within
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43832 of 2018 (3) dt.01-08-2018 2/2 six weeks from today in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No.240 of 2017, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P. C. with further conditions: (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be liable to cancel his bail bond and (3) if 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.
(Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- Rohit Kr.
U T