Sonu Patel v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.63268 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-367 Year-2016 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West Champaran ====================================================== Sonu Patel S/o Ranvijay Kumar Patel, resident of Village- Banuchhapar, P.S. Banuchhapar O.P., District- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sri Satyendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 26-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner seeks bail in Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 367 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under Section under Section 387 of the IPC and Section 3⁄4 of the Explosive Substances Act.
Allegation against the petitioner is of demanding ransom though he is not named in the FIR.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case on suspicion. Till date TIP of the petitioner has also not been conducted. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 19.03.2018.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63268 of 2018(2) dt.26-10-2018 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/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran, in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 367 of 2016, 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