High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ashok Rai vs The State Of Bihar on 30 March, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Ashok Rai vs The State Of Bihar on 30 March, 2011
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             Cr.Misc. No.1586 of 2011
                         ASHOK RAI S/O LATE WAKIL RAI
                                      Versus
                              THE STATE OF BIHAR
                                     -----------

2. 30.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

state.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for

the offence under Sections 395, 397 of the Indian Penal

Code and Section 412 I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act.

The petitioner was refused bail earlier by an order

dated 6.9.2010 vide Cr. Misc. No. 24319/2010 by giving

him liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of

charge if same is done conjointly.

It has been submitted that now charges have

been framed and, therefore, he is entitled for bail.

Considering the same, 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 learned Additional Sessions

Judge, F.T.C.-V, West Champaran, Bettiah in connection

with Sessions Trial NO. 405 of 2010 arising out of

Chanpatia P.S. Case No. 61/2010, 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 to how he is related with the petitioner and the other
2

bailors shall be the mother of the petitioner. The bailors

will undertake to furnish information to the Court about

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

shall also state on affidavit that they 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.

The court concerned will verify the fact that the

petitioner is accused only 3 other cases before releasing

him on bail.

Fahad.                                    ( Anjana Prakash, J.)