Patna High CourtCR. MISC./69304/2019bail granted

Sunit Kumar @ Golden Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2020-03-04Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69304 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-472 Year-2018 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria ====================================================== SUNIT KUMAR @ GOLDEN KUMAR Son of Lukho Singh Resident of Village-Nayagaon, Pachkhutti, P.S.-Parbatta, District-Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rakesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mohammad Sufyan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 04-03-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 05.09.2019 in connection with Parbatta P.S.Case No. 472 of 2018 for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 323 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the accusation of indiscriminate firing by the accused persons including the petitioner. It is submitted that according to the FIR itself, no fire-arm injury was caused to the informant. The fire-arm injury of the informant found by the doctor as recorded in the case diary is therefore of doubtful nature. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. 1st, Khagaria in connection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69304 of 2019(4) dt.04-03-2020 2/2 with Parbatta P.S.Case No. 472 of 2018, on the following condition-- (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 co-operate 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) 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) HR/- U T