IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.19711 of 2010
SAKAL DEO YADAV
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
-----------
02/ 16.06.2010 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
The petitioner is in custody in connection with Sessions
Trial No. 521 of 2006 / 90 of 2009 arising out of Kawakole P.S. Case
No. 5 of 2005 for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149,
341, 324, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the
Arms Act.
This is a case of misuse of the privilege of bail.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has never misused of privilege of bail and was regularly appearing in
the Court concerned. The charge was framed on 20.6.2007 and
thereafter there was no progress in the trial. In the meanwhile, the
petitioner went to Surat for earning his livelihood entrusting the pairvi
on his pairviwar. Learned counsel submits that it is by reason of
absence of pairvi and communication gap that he was never informed
regarding the progress of trial and as a consequence whereof his bail
bond was cancelled on 20.6.2009. The petitioner was taken into
custody on 22.4.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
there was no deliberate laches on the part of the petitioner who
undertakes to attend the trial on each and every date without failure.
Having regard to the submissions aforesaid, let the
-2-
petitioner Sakaldeo Yadav be released on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of Additional District and Sessions
Judge, 4th, Nawada in connection with Sessions Trial No. 521 of 2006
/ 90 of 2009 arising out of Kawakole P.S. Case No. 5 of 2005 subject
to the following conditions:
(i) That one of the bailors would be his son Pappu Yadav
who has sworn the affidavit before this Court.
(ii) The petitioner would be attending the trial on each and
every date fixed in the case and the failure on his part to
attend the trial on two consecutive dates without any
reasonable explanation to the satisfaction of the trail
court would confer liberty on the court concerned to
initiate proceedings for cancellation of his bail bonds
and for taking him into custody.
S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)