Chamru Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54321 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2018 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Begusarai ====================================================== CHAMRU RAM Son of Late Baso Ram Resident of Village - Rampur, Matihani, P.S.- Matihani, District - Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sandip Kumar Gautam For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uday Chand Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 28-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 54 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 421, 424, 409, 477A, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioner had earlier moved this Court for regular bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 3564 of 2019 which was dismissed on 26.02.2019.

It has been submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner is ready to deposit a sum of Rs. one lac in the court below subject to final outcome of the case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. one

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54321 of 2019(2) dt.28-08-2019 2/2 lac in the court below which will be subject to final outcome of the case. On doing so, the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Begusarai, in connection with Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 54 of 2018 subject to the conditions that:-

(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 and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty 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) veena/- U T