Pappu Deo v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32646 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2016 Thana- BIHRA District- Saharsa ====================================================== Pappu Deo, Son of Late Durganand Deo, Resident of Village+P.O.- Bihra, P.S.- Bihra, 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. Sri Ahmad Ali ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Bihra P.S. Case No. 38 of 2016 (G.R. 766/2016) registered for the offence punishable under Sections 384, 386, 504, 506, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against petitioner is that he demanded extortion money from the informant on telephone from jail and on refusal, threatened to kill.

By order dated 14.08.2018 a report was called for from the trial court with regard to the stage of the trial and time likely to be consumed in concluding the trial, pursuant to which report has been received from the court of A.C.J.M. IV Saharsa, in which it is stated that charge has been framed in this case on 18.07.2018 and the case is pending for prosecution evidence. Petitioner was remanded in this case on 20.08.2016 since then he is in custody.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32646 of 2018(5) dt.10-09-2018 2/2 Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. IV, Saharsa, in connection with Bihra P.S. Case No. 38 of 2016 (G.R. 766/2016), 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 present 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