Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32933/2016bail granted

Suresh Gope v. The State Of Bihar

2016-08-20Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32933 of 2016 (2) dt.20-08-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32933 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -317 Year- 2015 Thana -CHANDI District- NALANDA (BIHARSHARIFF) ====================================================== Suresh Gope Son of Devnarayan Gope Resident of village- Beldhana, P.S.- Chandi, District- Nalanda .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Kumar For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 20-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 31.10.2015 in connection with Chandi P.S. Case No. 317 of 2015 for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and similarly situated co-accused Subhash Gope has been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 24513 of 2016 after noticing the materials in the case diary pointing to co-accused Devnarayan Gope who is attributed to have given the fatal blow to the deceased and whose bail petition has been rejected.

4. Learned APP assisted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32933 of 2016 (2) dt.20-08-2016 informant appears and opposes the bail petition.

5. 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 Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Hilsa (Nalanda) in connection with S.T. No. 92 of 2016 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.

(iii) That the petitioner shall remain physically present 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) Chandran/Ibrar U T