Durga Nand Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78416 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2019 Thana- BIHRA District- Saharsa ====================================================== DURGA NAND SINGH Son of Radhakant Singh Resident of Village - Mohanpur, P.S.- Nauhatta, District - Saharsa. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Bihra P.S. Case No. 142 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-B)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

Allegation is recovery of stolen motorcycle and two live cartridges from the possession of petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner was a pillion rider and was not aware that the motorcycle is stolen one and no cartridges was recovered from his possession. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 11.08.2019.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78416 of 2019(2) dt.02-12-2019 2/2 the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below, in connection with Bihra P.S. Case No. 142 of 2019 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 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty to cancel his bail bond.

(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