- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.03.2017 passed in B.A. No. 376/2017. By way of the present bail application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail. It is further submitted that earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was primarily rejected on the ground that the informant claimed to have identified the petitioner during the Test Identification Parade. However, the informant has already appeared in the trial as PW.1, but he failed to identified the petitioner on the dock. In that view of the matter, the petitioner who is in judicial custody since 21.09.2015, may be given the privilege of regular bail.
(3.) Learned A.P.P opposes the petitioner's prayer for bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Hazaribagh in connection with S.T. No. 72/2016, arising out of Barhi P.S. Case No. 191/2014 (G.R. No. 2485/2014), subject to the condition that the petitioner shall co- operate in the trial and shall be present as and when required by the Court, failing which the Trial Court is at liberty to pass appropriate order against the petitioner in accordance with law.;