Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24410 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -25 Year- 2018 Thana -GAYA RAIL P.S. District- GAYA ====================================================== Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Prasad, S/o Sitaram Prasad, Resident of VillageMandrajbigha, P.S.- Delha, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 30-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 30.1.2018 in connection with Gaya Rail P.S. Case No.25 of 2018 for the offences alleged under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and no incriminating articles have been recovered from his possession. The Mobile Phone without Sim recovered from his possession belongs to the petitioner himself and it is stated that no case of theft of the Mobile Phone has been lodged by anyone. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

4. Learned A.P.P. assisted by learned counsel for the informant appearing suo mutu opposes the bail petition.

5. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24410 of 2018 (2) dt.30-04-2018 2/2 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 the like amount leach to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Railway Magistrate, Railway Court, Gaya, in connection with Gaya Rail P.S. case No.25 of 2018, on the following conditions :

(i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the 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) N.H./- U T