Ramroop Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.77911 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-270 Year-2017 Thana- BAUNSI District- Banka ====================================================== Ramroop Yadav son opf Chandar Yadav Resident of Village - Daliya, P.O. Bounsi, Distt - Banka.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Mukherjee For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Navin Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Bounsi P.S. Case No. 270 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against petitioner is of snatching of Rs. 4000/- as well as A.T.M. card, Pan card, Voter I card and some other articles from the informant.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is not named in the FIR. His name has surfaced in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused. Nothing has been recovered from his possession. It has been further submitted that similarly placed co-accused, namely,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.77911 of 2018(2) dt.04-01-2019 2/2 Mirtunjay Kumar Yadav @ Mirtunjay Yadav has been granted bail by this Hon'ble Court as contained in Annexure-2. Petitioner is in custody since 31.05.2018.

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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka, in connection with Bounsi P.S. Case No. 270 of 2017 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