Mukesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.36989 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2018 Thana- KISHUNPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Mukesh Yadav S/o Digamber Prasad Yadav, R/o Vill. + P.O. - Narhia Got, P.S.- Laukahi, District- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 28-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kishanpur P.S Case No. 34 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, three motorcycle borne criminals showing fear snatched motorcycle of Anil Sah and mobile of the informant and fled away, during investigation the name of the petitioner transpired and he confessed his guilt. Submission is of false implication and that there is no legal and cogent material against the petitioner. The petitioner has not been put on T.I.P., nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession and only on the basis of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36989 of 2018(2) dt.28-06-2018 2/2 confessional statement he is suffering in custody since 22.03.2018.

Learned A.P.P. submits that petitioner has got criminal antecedent as he is involved in seven cases. In the facts and circumstances stated above, now considering the detention of the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul, in connection with Kishanpur P.S. Case No. 34 of 2018, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajiv/- U T