Saurav Kumar Mishra @ Misharwa v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.51615 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -42 Year- 2016 Thana -BEGUSARAI GRP CASE DistrictBEGUSARAI ====================================================== Saurav Kumar Mishra @ Misharwa, son of Jaychand Mishra, resident of Village- Fulwaria, P.S.- Fulwaria, District- Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Mukeshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 16-12-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offence punishable under section 379 of the I.P.C Allegedly, lady purse of wife of the informant was lifted containing cash, mobiles, Mangalsutra, ring etc. and during course of investigation the name of the petitioner transpires in the confessional statement of co-accused Om Prakash Kumar. Submission is that save and except confessional statement of co-accused there is nothing against the petitioner, he has not been put on the test identification parade, nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession and without any fault he

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51615 of 2016 (3) dt.16-12-2016 2/2 is suffering in custody since 25.05.2016, Om Prakash Kumar has been allowed bail vide B.A. No. 1001 of 2016 and the case of this petitioner is on similar footing.

The learned A.P.P. submits that co-accused Om Prakash Kumar has been granted bail.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Rail Judicial Magistrate, Barauni in Barauni Rail P.S. Case No. 42 of 2016, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T