Patna High CourtCR. MISC./41381/2016bail granted

Rakesh Ranjan @ Pappu v. The State Of Bihar

2016-09-30Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41381 of 2016 (2) dt.30-09-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.41381 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No. -222 Year- 2016 Thana -MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Rakesh Ranjan @ Pappu, Son of Late Ashok Kumar Sharma, Resident of Village - Arijpur, P.S. - Kanti, District - Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 30-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 14.07.2016 in connection with Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. Case No. 222 of 2016 for the offences alleged under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the petitioner has no concern with the transaction of sale made in favour of one Ram Swarth Thakur. The F.I.R. has been instituted in relation to a dispute which is essentially of civil nature. It is stated that co-accused Sangita Ojha has been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 32053 of 2016.

4. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. Case No. 222 of 2016, with the following conditions:-

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41381 of 2016 (2) dt.30-09-2016 (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial. (iii) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure to do so on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/BT U T