Beni Rishideo v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.63900 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -828 Year- 1999 Thana -COMPLAINT CASE District- ARRARIA ======================================================

1. Beni Rishideo, S/o Late Boku Rishideo, Resident of Village- Mojaha, P.S.- Bhargama, District- Araria.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Mahabir Rishideo, S/o Late Badari Rishideo, Resident of VillageMojaha, P.S.- Bhargama, District- Araria. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar-1, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Supplementary Complaint Case No. 828C/1999, registered for offences punishable under Sections 147, 326, 354, 364, 365, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R. is that the petitioner along with other co-accused had taken away the son of the complainant to earn more money at Panjab but he did not return and it was alleged that the petitioner and others have kidnapped the son of the complainant.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion and nothing has been found against the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63900 of 2018 (2) dt.25-10-2018 2/2 petitioner and he has no criminal antecedent and the petitioner is in custody since 06.05.2018.

Heard learned A.P.P also.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Araria in connection with Supplementary Complaint Case No. 828C/1999, subject to the following conditions:- i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court. ii) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.

iii) It is made clear that if petitioner found involved in any of the like offences, in future, prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T