High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Mushan Paswan vs State Of Bihar on 29 September, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Mushan Paswan vs State Of Bihar on 29 September, 2010
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                      Cr.Misc. No.26070 of 2010
            MUSHAN PASWAN S/O LATE SUNDAR PASWAN
                                Versus
                         STATE OF BIHAR
                               -----------

3. 29.09.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and

the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted

for the offence under Sections 392 I.P.C. but charge

sheet was submitted under Section 394, 411 of the

Indian Penal Code.

It has been submitted that the petitioner’s

uncle gave an incriminating statement against the

petitioner that when the police came he ran away at

which the motor cycle was recovered from the

‘Bahiyar’.

Considering that the recovery was not for his

conscious possession, let the petitioner above named,

be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

5,000/-(Five thousand) with two sureties of the like

amount each or any other surety to be fixed by the

court concerned to the satisfaction of Judicial

Magistrate, Bhagalpur connection with Sabour P.S.

Case No. 231/05, subject to the conditions, (i) That

one of the bailor will be a close relative of the

petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as
2

to how he is related with the petitioner and the other

bailor shall be the brother of the petitioner. The bailor

will undertake to furnish information to the Court about

any change in address of the petitioner. (ii) That the

bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform

the court concerned if the petitioner is implicated in

any other case of similar nature after his release in the

present case and thereafter the court below will be at

liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail

on ground of misuse, (iii) That the petitioner will give

an undertaking that he will receive the police papers on

the given date and be present on date fixed for charge

and if he fails to do so on two given dates and delays

the trial in any manner, his bail will be liable to be

cancelled for reasons of misuse, (iv) That the petitioner

will be well represented on each date if he fails to do

so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be

cancelled.

It has been submitted that there were 7 other

cases pending against the petitioner but in 6 of them

he has already been acquitted and one is still pending.

This shall be verified by the Magistrate before releasing

the petitioner on bail.

Fahad.                             ( Anjana Prakash, J. )