Gabbar Dom v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32437 of 2018 (3) dt.02-07-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32437 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -55 Year- 1995 Thana -SIWAN MUFFASIL District- SIWAN ====================================================== Gabbar Dom Son of Late Mohan Dom resident of Village - Naya Bazar, Bail Hatta, P.S. Siwan (T), District - Siwan. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Rajeev Nayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The present case is one of the abuses of privilege of bail.

Leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not aware of the cancellation of the bail bonds and the same was occasioned only because of non-pairvi before the concerned court. It is further submitted that petitioner being the only bread earner had gone outside to earn his livelihood and when he came, he was arrested for the said misuse. Considering the reasons as made out in the present bail application, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M. -

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32437 of 2018 (3) dt.02-07-2018 IX, Siwan in connection with Siwan (Muffaso;) P.S. Case No. 55 of 1995 correspondent to Tr. No. 226 of 2018, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) One of the bailors will be his own blood relative, preferably, father, mother, brother, sister and/or his wife.

(2) The petitioner shall not indulge himself in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(3) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of his failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(4) 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.

(Anjana Mishra, J) Jagdish/- U T