High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ram Deo Mahto vs The State Of Bihar on 22 September, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Ram Deo Mahto vs The State Of Bihar on 22 September, 2011
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Cr.Misc. No.31281 of 2011
                           Ram Deo Mahto, son of Late Goni Mahto
                                             Versus
                                     The State Of Bihar
                                           -----------

2. 22.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for

the offence under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

It has been submitted that as per the material

collected during investigation, the petitioner was only found to

be sitting in the same vehicle where the owner of the vehicle

had ordered the co-accused Rahul Kumar to kill one of the

injured girls

Considering the same as also that the petitioner

has fair antecedent, let the petitioner above named, be released

on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand)

with three sureties of the like amount each or any other surety

to be fixed by the court concerned to the satisfaction of Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai, in connection with

Khodawandpur P.S. Case No. 60 of 2011, G.R. No. 1313 of

2011 subject to the following conditions: (i) That one of the

bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner, who will give an

affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the

petitioner, the second bailor shall be the wife of the petitioner
2

and the third bailor must be local since the petitioner belongs to

Samastipur. The bailor will undertake to furnish information to

the court about any change in the address of the petitioner. (ii)

That the affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioner is not an

accused in any other case and, if he is, he shall not be released

on bail. (iii) 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 the ground of misuse.

(iv) 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. (v)That the petitioner will be

well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two

consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled.

( Anjana Prakash, J.)
S.Ali