SUDAMA PASWAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an accused in the case registered under Sections 323 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(A)b/27 of the Arms Act.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that this is a case of misuse of bail; petitioner was earlier granted bail in the year 1992 and since thereafter he had gone to earn his livelihood to Delhi after instructing his lawyer to represent him, but his bail bond was cancelled for non-representation; petitioner is now in custody for more than a year and not even single wintness has been examined in the trial court till date; learned counsel submitted that he has instruction to undertake that the petitioner shall remain present in person on all the dates in the court below and he shall not again misuse the bail. Learned A.P.P. opposed the petitioner's prayer for bail but has not disputed the said contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to 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 learned 2 nd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in connection with S.T. No.335 of 1992 arising out of Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No.292 of 1991, with the condition that the bailors must be the local residents of the place within the territorial jurisdiction of learned court below and that the petitioner shall physically appear in the court below on all the dates, as and when his personal appearance is required in the case.