Rahul Pal v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2173 of 2018 (2) dt.16-01-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2173 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -690 Year- 2017 Thana -K. HAT District- PURNIA ====================================================== Rahul Pal S/o Uttam Pal, R/o Mohalla- Vivekanand Colony, near S.K. Misson School, Rajni Chowk, Purnea, P.S.- K. Hat (Sahayak), DistrictPurnea. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 16-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 29.09.2017 in connection with K. Hat P.S. Case No. 690 of 2017 for the alleged offences under Sections 379, 411, 43 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the subject motorcycle said to have been stolen has not been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is alleged that merely two master keys have been found in the possession of the petitioner. The FIR is against unknown persons. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea, in connection with K. Hat P.S. Case No. 690 of 2017 on the following conditions:-

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2173 of 2018 (2) dt.16-01-2018 (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) That the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iv) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/BT U T