Rohit Kumar Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 22 September, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Rohit Kumar Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 22 September, 2011
                                 Cr.Misc. No.31245 of 2011
                          Rohit Kumar Singh, son of Surendra Singh
                                    1. The State Of Bihar
                                    2. The Union of India.

3. 22.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the


The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for

the offence under Sections 20 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

Considering that the petitioner is in custody since

23.3.2011 for recovery of 10 Kgs. Ganja and he has fair

antecedent, 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 Sessions Judge,

Bhojpur at Ara, in connection with Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 40

of 2011 corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No. 5 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 and the

other shall be the cousin brother of the petitioner namely

Dharmendra. 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.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *