High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Sunil Thakur vs The State Of Bihar on 18 August, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Sunil Thakur vs The State Of Bihar on 18 August, 2010
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                            Cr. Misc. No.21181 of 2010
                      SUNIL THAKUR son of Late Bhola Thakur
                                      Versus
                             THE STATE OF BIHAR
                                     -----------

2/ 18.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the

offence under sections 302, 379, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It has been submitted that there is no eye witness to the

occurrence and the entire case is based on suspicion. The recovery of

mobile of the deceased is also explained stating that it has transpired

during investigation that the deceased and petitioner had been in a

relationship of trust and it was not unnatural for him to be in

possession of the mobile phone of the deceased.

In view of the such, 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 to the

satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea, in connection

with Barhara Kothi P.S. case no.1 of 2010, subject to the 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 bailors 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 petitioner will give an undertaking that he will

receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date
-2-

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 and if he fails to do so on two consecutive

dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled.

JA/-                                             (Anjana Prakash, J.)