Ganni Miyan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.53452 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -28 Year- 1993 Thana -DHANAHA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Ganni Miyan S/o Late Bheju Miyan, R/o Vill.- Virti, P.S.- Thakaraha, District- West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Milind Kumar Mishra, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Dhanaha P.S. Case No. 28/1993 (G.R. No. 590/1993), registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation is regarding recovery of skeleton of unknown. During course of investigation, the police raise suspicion against petitioner that he may be involved in the said murder.

It has been submitted that save and except suspicion, there is no material against petitioner. He is in custody since 20.01.2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53452 of 2018 (3) dt.19-09-2018 2/2 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 Judge II, Bagaha, West Champaran in connection with Dhanaha P.S. Case No. 28/1993 (G.R. Case No. 590/1993), 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