Suraj Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.16879 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -767 Year- 2014 Thana -ARARIA District- ARRARIA ====================================================== Suraj Yadav Son of Lalu Yadav Resident of village - Rahika Tola, Ward No. 17, Araria, P.S. Araria, Distt. - Araria .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s: Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 14-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the nature of allegation for offence under Sections 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and that the victim girl, after her recovery, has supported the allegation of her being forcibly taken away by two boys on motor cycle but then she has failed to name anyone of them, the petitioner, who has been made accused only on suspicion having no criminal antecedent, will be entitled for privilege of anticipatory bail.

That being so, if the petitioner, namely, Suraj Yadav, surrenders before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 767 of 2014; subject to the following conditions: (i) That both the bailors will be close family relatives of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16879 of 2015 (4) dt.14-08-2015 2/2 petitioner, who will undertake an affidavit giving genealogy as to how they are related with the petitioner. The bailors will also undertake to inform the court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.

(ii) That the affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioner is not accused in any other case and if he is, he shall not be released on bail.

(iii) That the bailors shall also state on affidavit that they will inform the court concerned, if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of his bail on the ground of misuse.

(iv) That the petitioner will be well represented on each and every date in course of trial and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled on this ground alone.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Sujit/- U