Sudama Prasad @ Sudama Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37052 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2017 Thana- SAHAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Sudama Prasad @ Sudama Kumar Son of Late Suresh Sao Resident of Village - Delia, P.S. Chouri, District - Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramanuj Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Jai Narain Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 28-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sahar P. S. Case No. 87 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, two co-accused and the petitioner issued forged medical certificate showing handicapped. Submission is of false implication and that the two doctors who are accused namely Dr. Neyaz Ashraf Siddiqui and Dr. Harish Chandra Chaudhary have already been allowed prearrest bail vide Cri. Misc. No. 40089 of 2017 and 41696 of 2017 by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the petitioner being a poor employee having no authority to issue certificate

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37052 of 2018(2) dt.28-06-2018 2/2 for handicapped, is suffering in custody since 28.04.2018 having no criminal antecedent.

Learned A.P.P. fairly submits that two co-accused have already been allowed pre-arrest bail.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur, at Arrah in connection with Sahar P.S. Case No. 87 of 2017, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T