Congress Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.22085 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -21 Year- 2016 Thana -KIHIRI MORE District- PATNA ======================================================
1. Congress Kumar Son of Sri Ram Pravesh Yadav
2. Lalbabu Yadav Son of Late Mungeshwar Yadav
3. Tunni Kumari Wife of Sri Subhash Yadav @ Daughter of Sri Ram Pravesh Yadav Resident of Village-Helha, P.S. Khiri More, District-Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Dipak For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Sakir Ahmad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 16-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
Petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Khiri More P.S. Case No. 21 of 2016, registered for the offence punishable under Sections304(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that other co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail by this court vide order dated 1405-2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 21837 of 2018. It has further been submitted that petitioner No. 1 is Debar, petitioner No. 2 is co-villager and petitioner No. 3 is Nanad of the deceased. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioners named above, in the event of their arrest or surrender in the court bellows within six weeks from today shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22085 of 2018 (3) dt.16-05-2018 of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Shri Piyush Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Danapur (Patna) in connection with Khiri More P.S. Case No. 21 of 2016 subject to the conditions as laid down u/S 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioners shall cooperate 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 cause will be liable to cancel his bail bond and (3) if petitioners tamper 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 petitioners.
(Sanjay Priya, J) A.K.V./- U T