- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
(2.) This is an application for grant of regular bail to the petitioner for the offence under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and subsequently, during investigation looted mobile phone of the informant, was recovered from the house of this petitioner, except that there is no evidence against him. Petitioner is in custody since 29.06.2009 i.e. for about one and half years. As stated in para12 of the bail application that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and as such, he may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail, but admits that criminal antecedent report, which was called for, in which there is no criminal antecedent against the petitioner.
(3.) In the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribag in connection with Patratu P. S. Case No. 111 of 2009 corresponding to G. R. Case No. 1602 of 2009, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be the local residents having property within the jurisdiction of the court. Petitioner will appear once every month in Court on date fixed, otherwise his bail bound would be liable to be cancelled.;