Rohit @ Tuntun @ Rohit Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69842 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-411 Year-2018 Thana- BODHGAYA DistrictGaya ====================================================== Rohit @ Tuntun @ Rohit Kumar Singh Son of Amrendra Singh Arun, Resident of Sidharthpuri Manpur P.S. Mufasil, District- Gaya, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sanjay Sinha, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party:

Mr. J.K. Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 28-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No. 411 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and except being named in the F.I.R., there is no specific accusation nor overt act attributed to the petitioner. The thrust of accusation is against Abhimanyu Singh, son of the informant of having fabricated forged deed of family settlement. The said co-accused Abhimanyu Singh has been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge in ABP No. 2739 of 2018. Similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. The petitioner has been made accused in three prior case which are however of different nature.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioner's

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69842 of 2018(3) dt.28-02-2019 2/2 arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No. 411 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C., and also subject to the following further conditions: (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial. (iii) That the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T