Tajdar @ Md. Tajdar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.31588 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -297 Year- 2015 Thana -MITHANPURA District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Tajdar @ Md. Tajdar Son of Akhtar, Resident of Village- Mojamma, Police Station- Sahebganj, District Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Alias Sanidh, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Mustaque Alam (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 22.04.2016 and 15.03.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. 8699 of 2016 and Cr. Misc. No. 5244 of 2017 respectively, on the ground that the petitioner is in custody since 02.11.2015, the petitioner was given liberty to renew his prayer for bail after examination of victim girl and victim girl has also been examined as P.W.7. The trial has not been concluded as yet and in near future it is not likely to be concluded.

The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that petitioner was given liberty to renew his prayer for bail after examination of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31588 of 2017 (2) dt.02-08-2017 2/2 victim girl.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner 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 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Mithanpura P.S. Case No. 297 of 2015 (S.T No. 17 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.) Rajiv/- U T