Jitendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24652 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -130 Year- 2017 Thana -INDUSTRIAL District- BHAGALPUR ====================================================== Jitendra Yadav, Son of Mahendra Yadav, resident of Village- Gopalpur, P.S. Industrial Area, District- Bhagalpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dr. Manoj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner, who is in custody since 21.11.2017, seeks bail in connection with Industrial P.S. Case No.130 of 2017 registered for the offences under Sections 392, 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation is that 3-4 unknown miscreants intercepted the informant and other vehicle owner and snatched cash amount and cell phones from possession of the informant and other driver.

It has been submitted that neither the petitioner has been arrested on the spot nor any incriminating article has been recovered from possession of the petitioner. The petitioner was

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24652 of 2018 (3) dt.18-05-2018 apprehended merely on suspicion and he has not been put on T.I. Parade till the date. The petitioner has clean antecedent. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the submission. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for bail is allowed and the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the likewise amount each to the satisfaction of learned District Judge, Bhagalpur in connection with Industrial P.S. Case No.130 of 2017 (Sessions Trial No.181 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) If the petitioner is found involved in future in similar type of allegation, the prosecution will have liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iv) The petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court and on the event of failure on his part to appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail.

(Sanjay Kumar, J) Harish/- U