Arun Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.68879 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2015 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE District- Gaya ====================================================== Arun Kumar, Son of Late Sheo Kumar Singh, Resident of Village- Dharaut, P.S.- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Ram Pratap Singh, S/o Lt. Lekhraj Singh, R/o Village- Turhari, P.S.- Shalurabad, District- Jehanabad.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nilesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Prem Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Protest cum Complaint Case No. 02 of 2015 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner is the husband of deceased and informant is the sister of deceased, who has alleged that petitioner committed murder of his wife and was pushed from the running train. Earlier a police case was registered and after investigation police found case not to be true and submitted final form against which informant had filed a protest petition against which cognizance has been taken. Earlier a U.D. case was also

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.68879 of 2018(2) dt.29-11-2018 2/2 registered for unnatural death.

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 Railways Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, in connection with Protest cum Complaint Case No. 02 of 2015 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