Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.40715 of 2011 ====================================================== Ashok Kumar @ Arbind Rai, S/o Kailash Rai, resident of Near Magar Delhi, P.S. -Samastipur, District Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 4 23-02-2012 Heard the parties. The petitioner is in custody in connection with S.T. No.823 of 2010 arising from Agamkuan P.S. Case No.207 of 2009 for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . The allegation against unnamed accused is of causing death of the father of the informant while he was travelling from Patna to Vaishali by a public transport. The name of the petitioner has transpired during the course of investigation as he operates a Maruti van as a public transport. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that except the confessional statement of this petitioner there is no other material on record connecting this petitioner with the alleged occurrence, in which the deceased father of the informant was robbed of his money, his mobile as also his life. The petitioner is also involved in another case arising out of Rail P.S. Case No.293 of 2009 from where he has been remanded in the present case. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40715 of 2011 (4) dt.23-02-2012 2 Considering the circumstances and the submission of learned counsel, let the petitioner, namely, Ashok Kumar alias Arbind Rai be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District Judge-II, Patna City in connection with S.T. No.823 of 2010 arising from Agamkuan P.S. Case No.207 of 2009 subject to the condition that the petitioner shall be personally present before the trial court on each and every date fixed in the trial and failure on the part of the petitioner to be personally present on two consecutive dates fixed in the trial without reasonable explanation to the satisfaction of the trial court, would entitle the court concerned to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner and to take him into custody. SKPathak/- (Jyoti Saran, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 201

Statute Text:
Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Causing disappearance of evidence of an offence committed, or giving false information touching it to screen the offender, If a capital offence. Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, causes any evidence of the commission of that offence to disappear, with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment, or with that intention gives any information respecting the offence which he knows or believes to be false; if a capital offence — shall, if the offence which he knows or believes to have been committed is punishable with death, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with imprisonment for life — and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment which may extend to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with less than ten years imprisonment — and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for any term not extending to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of the description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-fourth part of the longest term of the imprisonment provided for the offence, or with fine, or with both.