Santosh Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66484 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-215 Year-2013 Thana- BARBIGHA DistrictSheikhpura ====================================================== SANTOSH RAM S/o Krishana Ram @ Krishnandan Ram R/o villageParnama, P.S.- Sarmera, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Tej Narayan Singh, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party:

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 18-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 406, 364, 396, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27/30 of the Arms Act registered in connection with Barbigha P.S. Case No. 215 of 2013.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and he is not named in the F.I.R. His name has transpired on the confessional statement of Munna Kunwar who has named other co-accused Duldul Thakur @ Sunil Thakur. Coaccused Munna Kunwar and Duldul Thakur @ Sunil thakur have since been granted bail and anticipatory bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 5419 of 2014 and Cr. Misc. No. 47445 of 2017 respectively. The petitioner claims clean antecedent.

4. Learned APP appears and has been heard. He has not pointed out any objective material against the petitioner from the case diary.

5. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioner's

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66484 of 2019(3) dt.18-12-2019 2/2 arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioner 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 Sri Radhe Shyam, learned Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura in connection with Barbigha P.S. Case No. 215 of 2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C., and also subject to the following further 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 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. (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) Ibrar//- U T