Ranjit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.48283 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-335 Year-2018 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== Ranjit Kumar, Son of Sri Shiv Nath Mandal, Resident of Village- Diwanganj, P.O.- Chilouri, Ward No.9, Via Pratapganj, District- Supaul. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amrit Abhijat For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Panchanand Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 335 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 10 Bihar Conduct of Examination Act, 1981. Allegation against the petitioner is that he made to appear some other person at the examination in his place. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48283 of 2018(2) dt.18-09-2018 2/2 a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul, in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 335 of 2018, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C 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) ranjan/- U