Munna Yadav @ Munna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.53468 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -35 Year- 2018 Thana -ATRI District- GAYA ====================================================== Munna Yadav @ Munna Kumar S/o Harinandan Yadav, R/o Vill.- Narawat, P.S.- Atri And District- Gaya.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No-2, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in Atri P.S. Case No. 35/2018, registered for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
Informant is father of deceased who in his written complaint has alleged that petitioner and other family members killed his daughter by strangulation.
It has been submitted that after investigation the police found the case to be not true and submitted final report. However, learned Magistrate differing with the investigation of Investigating Officer took cognizance under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code against all the accused, named in the F.I.R. It has been further submitted that since it was family dispute, matter has been
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53468 of 2018 (3) dt.19-09-2018 2/2 resolved by compromise.
Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist, Gaya in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 35/2018, subject to the 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 bonds.
(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) Vinita/- U T