Tuntun Rai @ Tun Tun Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.56872 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -29 Year- 2018 Thana -ARA NAWADA District- BHOJPUR ====================================================== Tuntun Rai @ Tun Tun Pandey S/o Late Kunal Pandey, R/o vill.- Dihari, P.S.- Navanagar, District- Buxar, at present address- Doman Dihara, P.S.- Agiaon (Sahar), District- Bhojpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dudh Nath Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar-1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 29/2018, registered for the offence punishable under Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation is kidnapping of informant's son aged about two and half years.

It has been submitted that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He is not named in the F.I.R. His name has surfaced in this case on the confession of co-accused Meena Devi. The boy has been recovered on the same day from the school and not from the possession of petitioner.

Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He is in custody since 14.01.2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56872 of 2018 (3) dt.01-11-2018 2/2 Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 29/2018, subject to the 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 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court.

(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) Vinita/- U T