Saryu Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49210 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2018 Thana- GOH District- Aurangabad ====================================================== SARYU RAM Son of Late Shivnandan Ram Resident of Village - Banahi, P.S.- Pauthu, Dist.- Aurangabad (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjit Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Goh P.S. Case No. 105 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 385, 386, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of Arms Act and 17 CLA Act.

Petitioner had earlier moved this Court for regular bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 77720 of 2018 which was rejected on 18.01.2019 with a liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge in the court below itself.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49210 of 2019(2) dt.07-08-2019 2/2 It has been submitted on behalf of petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from his possession. Petitioner is in custody since 19.05.2018. Charge has been framed in this case. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Daudnagar, Aurangabad, in connection with Goh P.S. Case No. 105 of 2018 subject to the conditions that:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty to cancel his bail bond.

(3) 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.

(S. Kumar, J) veena/- U T