Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.31894 of 2012 ====================================================== Niranjan Kumar, son of Sri Daya Nand Prasad, resident of Village- Aima Chauki, P.S. Khizersarai, Distt – Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 2 05-09-2012 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make appropriate corrections in paragraph 1 and the prayer portion of this application as regarding the designation of the court. Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Belaganj P.S. Case No.23 of 2011(Tr. No.1544 of 2012) for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . The prayer of this petitioner was earlier rejected by order dated 1.3.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No.33294 of 2011, inter alia, on grounds of the petitioner being a party to the robbing of Bolero vehicle as well as recovery of a mobile Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31894 of 2012 (2) dt.05-09-2012 2 phone and being identified by the informant. Mr. Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the allegation aforesaid the petitioner having a clean antecedent has remained in custody since 23.3.2011. Regard being had to the submission of learned counsel and the period of custody, let the petitioner, namely, Niranjan Kumar 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 Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gaya in connection with Belaganj P.S. Case No.23 of 2011 (Tr. No.1544 of 2012) subject to the condition that the petitioner shall ensure his representation before the trial court on each and every date fixed in the trial and failure on the part of the petitioner to ensure his representation 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 his bail bonds and to take him into custody. SKPathak/- (Jyoti Saran, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 392

Statute Text:
Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Robbery. Whoever commits robbery shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if the robbery be committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise, the imprisonment may be extended to fourteen years.