Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36152/2017bail granted

Vikash Kumar Verma @ Dablu @ Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-20Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.36152 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -296 Year- 2013 Thana -MUFFASIL District- AURANGABAD ====================================================== Vikash Kumar Verma @ Dablu @ Vikash Kumar, Son of Pradeep Mehta, Resident of Village Telhara, P.S. Amba District- Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Bindeshwar Prasad Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 20-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 23.01.2017 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 108 of 2017/20 of 2017 arising out of Muffasil P.S. Case No. 296 of 2013 for the offences alleged under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently Sections 395, 120(B) of the I.P.C. were added.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the extra judicial confessional statement of coaccused Sujit Kumar Verma. No recovery has been made from the petitioner nor has he been put on Test Identification Parade for his identification. Similarly situated co-accused Pukar Mehta @ Pukar Mahato has been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 11571 of 2016.

4. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-VII, Aurangabad, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 108 of 2017/20

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36152 of 2017 (3) dt.20-09-2017 of 2017arising out of Muffasil P.S. Case No. 296 of 2013, on the following conditions:- (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 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.

(iv) The petitioner shall cooperate 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.

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/BT U T