Prinshu Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.68735 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-224 Year-2018 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Prinshu Choudhary S/o Sudama Choudhary Resident of Village - Barka Rampur P.S.-Kargahar District - Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 18-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 354(A), 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of the POCSO Act registered in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No. 224 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the entire incident is denied. In any event, the parties have compromised the dispute by filing a compromise petition before learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-1, Rohtas at Sasaram. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioner's 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 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court of POCSO Act, Rohtas at Sasaram, in connection with Kargahar P.S. Case No. 224 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.68735 of 2018(3) dt.18-01-2019 2/2 and with 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 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. (iv) 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.

BT/Chandran (Vikash Jain, J) U T