Md. Azad Akhtar @ Azad Akhtar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.68353 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2018 Thana- KONCH District- Gaya ====================================================== Md. Azad Akhtar @ Azad Akhtar, Son of Mazruddin, Resident of MohallaOld Karimganj Road No.2, P.S.- Civil Line, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sheikh Arkan Ahmad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Smt Indu Kumari Srivastava ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Konch P.S. Case No. 177 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant is the police officer who has alleged that one stolen motorcycle was recovered from three persons who were standing near the motorcycle and on demand could not produce ownership of said vehicle.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no concern with the stolen motorcycle. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 04.06.2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.68353 of 2018(2) dt.03-12-2018 2/2 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 A.C.J.M.-IIIrd, Gaya, in connection with Konch P.S. Case No. 177 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