Arjun Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.77120 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-547 Year-2017 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Arjun Rai Son of Jawahar Rai, Resident of Village-Naya Tola, P.S. Danapur, District Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ajay Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sri Vinod Shankar Modi For the informant :
Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 11-01-2019 Heard Mr. Ajay Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned Sr. counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner is in custody in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 547 of 2017 for the offence under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 302 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He is in custody since 27.9.2018. He further submits that the police after completion of investigation has submitted final form and differing with the final form the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence. Considering the fact that petitioner is in custody since 27.9.2018 and the fact that police after investigation has
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.77120 of 2018(2) dt.11-01-2019 2/2 submitted final form against the petitioner, the Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, let the petitioner, named above, 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 learned Additional District Judge-II, Danapur, in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 547 of 2017. However, it is made clear that in case petitioner is found indulged in terrorising the witnesses, the Court below is at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner in case of such abuse by the petitioner.
(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Ravi/- U T