Lalan Raut v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.77218 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2017 Thana- KAMTAUL District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Lalan Raut, S/o- Late Babujee Raut @ Babuji Raut, Resident of Village/ Mohalla- Ratanpur, P.S. Kamtaul, District- Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kedar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 145 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 147, 148, 149, 504, 354B, 324, 448 of the Indian Penal Code and later on Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code was also added.

Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide Annexure-2 giving a liberty to renew his prayer after six months in jail custody.

It has been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 30.05.2018.

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/- with two sureties of the like

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.77218 of 2018(2) dt.02-01-2019 2/2 amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in connection with Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 145 of 2017, with following 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 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court below.

(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) Sanjay/- U T