Pintu Mahto @ Pinku Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55580 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2019 Thana- UPHARA District- Aurangabad ====================================================== PINTU MAHTO @ PINKU MAHTO Son of Sri Ramdeo Mahto Resident of Village - Baijalpur, P.S.- Uphara, Dsit.- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Madhuri Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 27-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 04.05.2019 in connection with Uphara P.S. Case No. 23 of 2019 for the alleged offences under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with the alleged murder of the informant's son. It is submitted that the deceased was residing at the house of his parents-in-law with whom there was property dispute. No specific accusation whatsoever has been made in the FIR against the petitioner, who merely happens to be a covillager of the father-in-law of the deceased. No specific role has been assigned to him. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP appears and has been heard. No incriminating material however has been pointed out against the petitioner from the case diary.

5. Be that as it may, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Daudnagar, Aurangabad arising out of Uphara P.S.Case No. 23 of 2019 on the following conditions--

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55580 of 2019(3) dt.27-11-2019 2/2 (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) 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) HR/- U T