Md. Hiru v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.44710 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -21 Year- 2018 Thana -INDUSTRIAL District- BHAGALPUR ======================================================
1. Md. Hiru, Son of Late Md. Shabuddin, resident of Mohalla- Joparpatti (Near Police Line), P.S.- Ishakchak, District- Bhagalpur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ram Anurag Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 05-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
The Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Industrial P. S. Case No. 21 of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Sections 394 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. but later on during investigation, the name of the petitioner has surfaced. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that except confession, there is absolutely nothing against the petitioner and though, he is an accused in 12 cases but the petitioner has been granted bail except the present case. Heard learned A.P.P also.
Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44710 of 2018 (3) dt.05-09-2018 2/2 circumstances, as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IX, Bhagalpur in connection with Industrial P. S. Case No. 21 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. No. 1211 of 2018, subject to the following conditions:- i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court. ii) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.
iii) It is made clear that if petitioner found involved in any of the like offences, in future, prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T