Dinesh Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54690 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -21 Year- 2016 Thana -KHAIRA District- JAMUI ====================================================== Dinesh Thakur, son of Lakhan Thakur, resident of Chananwar, P.S. Khaira, District - Jamui.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 23-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in custody since 03.02.2016 in connection with U.A.P. Case No. 10/16, arising out of Khaira P.S. Case No. 21/16 for offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)A/26 of the Arms Act and Sections 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 of the U.A.P. Act.

The prosecution case is that the police personnel on tip off arrested the petitioner and on his confessional statement one pistol and 101 cartridges were recovered very far from his house near the mountains.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent, bears no criminal history, nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession and has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54690 of 2016 (2) dt.23-12-2016 2/2 falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case being just a passerby. It is submitted that charge-sheet has already been submitted, hence, there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

However, learned APP for the State submits that the petitioner is named in the First Information Report, hence, opposes the prayer for bail.

Be that as it may, since charge-sheet has already been submitted, let petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Jamui in connection with U.A.P. Case No. 10/16, arising out of Khaira P.S. Case No. 21/16, subject to the condition that one of the bailors would be a close relative and the other bailor must have sufficient immovable properties within the jurisdiction of the concerned police station and that petitioner shall appear before the court below on each and every date and failure to appear on two consecutive dates without assigning any reason will entail cancellation of his bail bonds.

(Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajesh/- U T