Md. Ajim @ Ajim v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.68857 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2018 Thana- KATIHAR GRP CASE District- Katihar ====================================================== Md. Ajim @ Ajim, Son of Md. Oshik, Resident of Village- Sisona, Ward No.9, P.S.- Jokihat, Dist- Araria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Kumar Virendra Narayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Katihar Rail P.S. Case No. 57 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 379/511 of the Indian Penal Code and 20/22 of N.D.P.S. Act and 137/147 Indian Railway Act.

Allegation against petitioner is recovery of 20 tablets of Activan of 0.2 mg. It is less than small quantity. Petitioner is in custody since 15.08.2018.

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/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.68857 of 2018(2) dt.03-12-2018 2/2 District & Session Judge cum Special Judge, Katihar, in connection with Katihar Rail P.S. Case No. 57 of 2018 subject to the conditions that:-

(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 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty 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) veena/- U T