Lakhan Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23252 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -33 Year- 2013 Thana -AKHODHIGOLA District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Lakhan Chaudhary son of Late Mahavir Chaudhary Resident of Village - Tetrarh, Police Station - Akorhigola, District - Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajni Kant Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 17-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 08.01.2017 in connection with Akorhigola P.S. Case No. 33 of 2013 for the alleged offences under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on mere suspicion. Recovery of the goods has admittedly been made from the house of the co-accused Shravan Yadav @ Sharavan Yadav who has been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 35225 of 2013. The informant is not an eye witness and there is no objective material to connect the petitioner with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. A perusal of paragraphs 6, 7, 8, 9 and 108 of the case diary reveals that none of the staff members of the shop appears to have identified the accused persons either by name or by face.

5. 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

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23252 of 2017 (4) dt.17-08-2017 thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dehri, District Rohtas in connection with Akorhigola P.S. Case No. 33 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 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) 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. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/BT U T