Bhola Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21963 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -28 Year- 2014 Thana -PIPRAKOTHI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Bhola Kumar, Son of Rajendra Ram, Resident of Village- Singaila, P.S. Motipur, District- East Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sri Abhay Kumar Roy (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 02-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew the prayer of bail, which was earlier twice rejected vide order dated 08.01.2016 and 28.09.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. 46022 of 2015 and Cr. Misc. No. 40388 of 2016 respectively, on the ground that the petitioner is in custody since 03.06.2014, he has been allowed bail in Motihari (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 62 of 2014. Confessional statement made before the police has got no evidentiary value in the eye of law and, as such, the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. submits that the petitioner has confessed his guilt and further snatched Scorpio vehicle has also been recovered with fire arms from the possession of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21963 of 2017 (3) dt.02-08-2017 2/2 petitioner.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the detention of the petitioner, now he is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari, in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 28 of 2014, 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.) Rajiv/- U T