Nemilal Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1876 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -530 Year- 2017 Thana -TURKAULIYA District- EASTCHAMPARAN (MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Nemilal Chaudhary, Son of Ram Chandra Chaudhary, Resident of Village Bairiya Dih, Police Station - Harsidhi, District - East Champaran at Motihari.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjana, Advocate For the Opposite Party: Mr. Jitendra Kr. Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 11-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 28.08.2017 in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 530 of 2017 for the offences alleged under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated merely on suspicion as he is not named in the first information report but subsequently his confession has been extracted before the police. No recovery of any incriminating articles has been made from the conscious possession of the petitioner nor any test identification parade has been conducted for his identification. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. 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 thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 530 of 2017, on the following conditions:-

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1876 of 2018 (2) dt.11-01-2018 2/2 (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 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. (iv) The petitioner shall cooperate 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.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran U T