Md. Kalim Ansari vs State Of Jharkhand

Deepak Roshan, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects as pointed out by the Registry is, hereby, ignored.

The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner for extension of time for furnishing bail bond by modifying order dated 20.7.2020 passed

in B.A. No. 4136 of 2020.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the earlier bail application was allowed by this court and the petitioner was directed to be released

on bail on furnishing personal bail bond of Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) and the petitioner was to furnish bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees

Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of one month from the date of lifting of the lockdown.

Mr. Prabhat Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to some communication gap though the petitioner furnished the personal

bond of Rs. 5,000/- but he did not furnish bail bond within stipulated period. Subsequently the petitioner realized that direction of this court was not

complied with in time and as such the instant petition has been filed for modification only for the purpose of furnishing bail bond.

Ms. Nehala Sharmin, learned A.P.P. does not object to the submission of the petitioner.

In view of the aforesaid facts the petitioner is directed to file bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like

amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribag in connection with Barkagaon P.S. No. 03 of 2019

corresponding to G.R. No.183 of 2019 within a period of two weeks from today.

The order dated 20.7.2020 is accordingly modified to the aforesaid extent.

With the aforesaid order, this Cr.M.P. is allowed.

Let this order be communicated to the learned Trial Court through Fax.