Sita Ram Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80335 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2012 Thana- KATORIYA District- Banka ====================================================== SITA RAM DAS Son of Late Baldeo Das Resident of Village - Chegakhar(Dhakwa), P.S.- Fullidumar, District- Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Brij Nandad Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umeshanand Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 395 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code.

FIR is registered against unknown. Informant has alleged that 8-10 unknown miscreants committed dacoity in his house and looted away cash, mobile phones and other household articles.

It has been submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner is not named in the FIR. His name has surfaced in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Tufani Das. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of petitioner and he has never been put on T.I.P. Petitioner has no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80335 of 2019(3) dt.18-12-2019 2/2 criminal antecedent and is in custody since 08.07.2019. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below, in connection with Katoriya (Jaipur) P.S. Case No. 232/2012 subject to the conditions that:-

(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 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty 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) veena/- U T