Lalan Rai @ Lalan Ray vs State Of Jharkhand

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned A.P.P. for the State and the counsel appearing for the informant, through Video Conferencing.

The lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding which has been held through video conferencing today at 10.30 a.m. They have no

complain with respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.

Defects are ignored.

Petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Deori Police

Station Case No. 06 of 2020, pending in the Court of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

Looted vehicle was recovered from the co-accused, who was driving the said vehicle. It is alleged that the petitioner, who was also in the vehicle,

managed to flee.

Considering the fact that the petitioner was not apprehended from the spot and chargesheet has already been submitted as also considering that the

petitioner is in custody since 13.01.2020, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner, namely, Lalan Rai @ Lalan Ray, 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 the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in connection with Deori Police Station Case No. 06 of 2020, subject to the

following conditions: -

(i) One of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner, having sufficient landed property in his own name within the district of Giridih;

(ii) The petitioner will submit a proof of his residential address at the time of furnishing bail bonds and he will not change his residence without the

permission of the Court;

(iii) The petitioner will appear and mark his attendance before the Officer-in-Charge, Deori Police Station, Giridih, once in every 15 days till

completion of the trial. If he fails to appear in any particular period, his bail bonds shall stand cancelled and the Officer-in-Charge concerned would be

at liberty to arrest the petitioner.