Amit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.62861 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-214 Year-2018 Thana- KHARHAGPUR District- Munger ====================================================== Amit Kumar Son of Birendra Kumar Resident of Mogal Bazar, P.S. Kotwali, Distt.-Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Karuna Nath Sahay For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Mustaque Alam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in Kharagpur P.S. Case No. 214 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant has alleged that on 11.07.2018, he along with his friend was coming from Belbigha on his motorcycle and when they reached near Kalambag Situhar Bridge, they were intercepted by three unknown motorcycle borne miscreants who snatched his motorcycle, two mobile phones and Rs. 22,500/-. FIR is against unknown.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the name of the petitioner has surfaced in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Md. Sanowar. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.62861 of 2018(2) dt.12-10-2018 2/2 Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 28.07.2018.

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/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger, in connection with Kharagpur P.S. Case No. 214 of 2018, with following conditions:-

(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 present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient 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) ranjan/- U