Patna High CourtCR. MISC./62857/2018bail granted

Sikandar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2018-10-12Mr. Justice S. Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.62857 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -113 Year- 2001 Thana -KUSHESHWARASTHAN DistrictDARBHANGA ====================================================== Sikandar Sah Son of Late Bhagwat Sah, Resident of Village-Makhnahi, Police Station-Alauli, Distt.-Khagariya.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Girish Chandra Jha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Kusheshwar Asthan P.S. Case No. 113/2001 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 205/2002, registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.

Earlier the petitioner has been granted bail vide order dated 02.01.2003 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 20233/2002, but his bail bond was cancelled on 23.01.2016, as pairvi was not done on behalf of him. He is in custody since 02.07.2018. Fresh charge has been framed against him on 09.07.2018.

Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional District & Sessions

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.62857 of 2018 (2) dt.12-10-2018 2/2 Judge-2nd, Benipur, Darbhanga in connection with Kusheshwar Asthan P.S. Case No. 113/2001 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 205/2002, subject to the 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 present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bonds.

(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) Vinita/- U T