Arvind Rai @ Ravindra Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.76059 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2017 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== Arvind Rai @ Ravindra Rai, son of Late Anup Rai, resident of village Narainpur Bedauliya, P.S. Goraul, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Kaushal Kishor For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sri Surendra Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Goraul P.S. Case No. 324 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 324, 307, 354-B, 379, 506, 504 of the Indian Penal Code. Informant has alleged that on his complaint made to the authority regarding sub standard material was used in construction of school, they came to his shop and brutally assaulted him. Allegation against petitioner is that he assaulted Shyam Sundar Rai by iron rod over his head and chest. Nature of injury was found to be simple. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 26.10.2018.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.76059 of 2018(2) dt.18-12-2018 2/2 Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali, in connection with Goraul P.S. Case No. 324 of 2017 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