Upendra Yadav @ Upendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.47201 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -15 Year- 2006 Thana -SURYAPURA District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Upendra Yadav @ Upendra Singh, Son of Dhirja Nand Singh, Resident of Village- Govindih, Police Station- Piro, District- Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER ---------- 15-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No.90 of 2016, arising out of Surajpura P.S. Case No.15 of 2006, registered under Sections 396 and 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. During investigation, the name of the petitioner has surfaced in this case in the confessional statement of the co-accused Kamta Yadav, Chole Lal Yadav and Ganesh Singh, as detailed in paragraphs119, 120 and 121 of the case diary, respectively. Except that,
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47201 of 2016 (5) dt.15-03-2017 2/2 there is nothing against the petitioner to show his involvement in the present case. The informant has claimed to identify the culprits on seeing them again but the petitioner has not been put on T.I. Parade till date while he is in custody since 09.09.2015. Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Rohtas at Sasaram, in connection with Sessions Trial No.90 of 2016, arising out of Surajpura P.S. Case No.15 of 2006. Out of the two sureties, one must be close relative of the petitioner, who will file an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he/she is related with the petitioner. The bailors will undertake to furnish information to the court about any change in the address of the petitioner.
(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T