Mehapal Kachhawa @ Mehapal Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.31438 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -101 Year- 2015 Thana -KOILWAR DistrictBHOJPUR ====================================================== Mehapal Kachhawa @ Mehapal Singh S/o Naga Ji Kachhawa Resident of Village Amlethi, Police Station Bilapa, District Ratalam (M.P.). .... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajiva Ranjan, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kr. Singhm, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL ORAL ORDER 19-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 427 of IPC 3⁄4 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act and Section 151 of Railway Act.
Allegation is that the while driving a overloaded truck beyond its height the petitioner entered into the bridge. Due to his negligence and rash driving 35 pipes have been damaged when the repair of railway project was going on.
It is submitted that the petitioner has not caused any damage knowingly. He has been in custody since 9.5.2015 having no criminal antecedent. However, after investigation charge-sheet
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31438 of 2015 (2) dt.19-08-2015 2/2 has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with the witnesses.
Considering the facts and circumstances, the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur, Ara/court concerned after framing of charge in Koilwar P. S. Case No. 101 of 2015 with following conditions:-
1. The petitioner will not indulge himself in similar or any other offence.
2. One of the bailors must be the close relative of the petitioner.
3. The petitioner will be well represented in the Court on each and every date and in case of absence for two consecutive dates or in case of violation of terms of bail, his bail bond would be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.
(Amaresh Kumar Lal, J) Kanchan/- U T