Shatrughan Sah @ Shatrudhan Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.43588 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2017 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== Shatrughan Sah @ Shatrudhan Sah, Son of Late Bigan Sah, Resident of Village- Purandarpur, Police Station- Malahi, District- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhurendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Ajit Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Mufasil (Lakhaura) P.S. Case No. 133 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 387 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant who is a school teacher has alleged demand of ransom on his mobile phone against unknown. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the mobile phone from which ransom was demanded does not belong to the petitioner. Petitioner has been remanded in this case on 07.09.2017. Except his own confession there is no incriminating material against the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43588 of 2018(3) dt.24-09-2018 2/2 the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari, in connection with Mufasil (Lakhaura) P.S. Case No. 133 of 2017, with following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bond.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) ranjan/- U