Sigheshwar Manjhi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.33216 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -5 Year- 2016 Thana -BARHAT District- JAMUI ======================================================

1. Singheshwar Manjhi son of Late Chanchani Manjhi

2. Munna Manjhi, son of Singheshwar Manjhi, Both are resident of Village- (Darha) Sudamapur, P.S. Barhat, District- Jamui.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 24-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Barhat P.S. Case No. 05 of 2016.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated merely because petitioner no. 1 happens to be the father of Jhagru Manjhi with whom the informant's daughter had voluntarily met at Jhajha Station after taking a tempo without informing anyone as evident from her own deposition under Section 164 Cr. P.C. The said Jhagru Manjhi has since been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 28396 of 2016. It is further submitted that it was a case of love affair between the informant's daughter and Jhagru Manjhi. The parties happened to be the neighbours of the same village.

4. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of the petitioners' arrest or

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33216 of 2016 (3) dt.24-08-2016 2/2 surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jamui in connection with Barhat P.S. Case No. 05 of 2016 (G.R. No. 156 of 2016), subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C., and also subject to the following further conditions: (i) That one of the bailors of each of the petitioners shall be their close relative.

(ii) The petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation and make themselves available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iii) The petitioners 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, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/BT U T