Dinesh Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25306 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -96 Year- 2004 Thana -NANHPUR District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Dinesh Sahani son of Nunu Sahani, Resident of village- Banaul, P.S.- Nanpur, District- Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md.Ansarul Haque(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

The petitioner is in custody in a complaint case under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C., later converted into Nanpur P.S. Case No. 96 of 2004.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that one complaint case was filed by one Gauri Sah against the four accused persons alleging therein that they have kidnapped the wife of the complainant and took away her ornaments and cloths.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that it is a case of misuse of bail. It is further submitted that due to bad health he was unable to attend the Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25306 of 2015 (2) dt.21-07-2015 06.12.2014.

On behalf of the State it has been submitted that the petitioner has misused the privilege of bail for a period of five years and hence, he should not be granted bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, 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 learned Additional District and Sessions Judge II, Sitamarhi, in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No. 96 of 2004 with the condition that the petitioner shall be present on each and every date and if the trial court finds that he is trying to hamper proceedings of the trial the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail of the petitioner. (Sudhir Singh, J) Chandran U T