Amit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1848 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2019 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj ====================================================== AMIT KUMAR Son of Sagar Prasad @ Sagar Prasad Bari R/o VillageMahamda, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody seeks bail in a case registered under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Informant has alleged that while he had parked his motorcycle and when he awoke, he found his motorcycle to be stolen. FIR was instituted against unknown. However, the stolen motorcycle was recovered from the garage of petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case without any basis as said motorcycle was brought by Santu Mishra for repair. Petitioner has been remanded in this case on 25.10.2019. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1848 of 2020(2) dt.14-01-2020 2/2 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 Manjhagarh P.S. Case No. 152 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