Sudish Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44928 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -44 Year- 2018 Thana -SONEPUR District- SARAN ======================================================

1. Sudish Rai S/o Ram Sohag Rai, R/o Vill.- Chhitarchak, P.S.- Sonpur, District- Saran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vitesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ganesh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 06-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sonpur P.S.Case no. 44 of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Sections 365, 364, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner is of kidnapping and murder of the son of the informant.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that except suspicion, there is nothing against the petitioner and the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that during investigation the police has submitted charge sheet without any evidence and he has been in custody since 22.01.2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44928 of 2018 (3) dt.06-09-2018 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P also.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Saran at Chapra in connection with Sonpur P.S. Case No. 44 of 2018, subject to the following conditions:- i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court. ii) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.

iii) It is made clear that if petitioner found involved in any of the like offences, in future, prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T