Dhiraj Thakur v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.67306 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -478 Year- 2018 Thana -KHAJANCHI HAT District- PURNIA ====================================================== Dhiraj Thakur S/o Mukesh Thakur Resident of Village-Ram Nagar P.S. Maranga (K.Hat), Distt.-Purnea .... .... 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 S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 26-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner seeks bail in connection with K. Hat P.S. Case No.478 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Informant has alleged that in course of vehicle checking, the motorcycle of petitioner was stopped and petitioner was asked to produce the ownership of the vehicle but he could not produce any ownership as vehicle was stolen vehicle. The pillion rider fled from the vehicle.
It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and had taken the vehicle from Suraj Mandal for purpose of marriage of her sister. He has no criminal antecedent and he is
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.67306 of 2018 (2) dt.26-11-2018 2/2 in custody since 09.07.2018.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Purnea in connection with K. Hat P.S. Case No.478 of 2018, with following conditions :-
(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned.
(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the Court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bond.
(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. (S. Kumar, J) Sanjeev/- U T