Md. Rafik Mian v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.65711 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2018 Thana- GAUNAHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Md. Rafik Mian Son of Wakil Mian Resident of Village- Harpur, P.S.- Gaunaha, District- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Anant Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Gaunaha P.S. Case No. 67 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 413, 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against petitioner is that a stolen Bolero Jeep was recovered from his possession.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It has been further submitted that petitioner has purchased the Bolero Jeep from Bilas Rai and he had no knowledge that the Bolero Jeep was stolen one. Similarly placed co-accused, namely Manoj Yadav has been granted bail vide order dated 28.09.2018

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.65711 of 2018(2) dt.01-11-2018 2/2 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 60076 of 2018. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 27.06.2018. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran, in connection with Gaunaha P.S. Case No. 67 of 2017 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 represented on each and every date fixed by the court.

(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