Allowed

Ram Pyare Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC15 Apr 2013CR. MISC./10673/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner instituted under Section 379 IPC for recovery of battery of stolen property. Bail was conditioned on furnishing a bond and specific undertakings regarding sureties, address changes, and appearance in court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties under specified conditions.

Ram Pyare Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.10673 of 2013

¶2

====================================================== Ram Pyare Kumar, son of Balkeshwar Mahto, resident of village Ordiha, P.S. Madanpur, Distt. Aurangabad.

¶3

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamlendra Pd. Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. Nagendra Pd., A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER

¶4

2 15-04-2013 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the State. The Petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the

¶5

offence under Section 379 Indian Penal Code.

¶6

Considering that the Petitioner is in custody since 12.1.2013 for recovery of Battery of the stolen Tempo and his brother Ram Shankar Mahto undertakes his responsibility, let the Petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each or any other surety to be fixed by the Court below to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, in connection with Salaiya P.S. Case No. 3 of 2013 subject to the following conditions: (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the Petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the Petitioner and the other shall be the brother of the Petitioner namely, Ram Shankar Mahto.

¶7

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10673 of 2013 (2) dt.15-04-2013

¶8

2/2

¶9

The bailor will also undertake to inform the Court if there is any change in the address of the Petitioner. (ii) That the affidavit shall clearly state that the Petitioner is not an accused in any other case and if he is, he shall not be released on bail. (iii) That the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the Petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse. (iv) That the Petitioner will give an undertaking that he will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if he fails to do so on two given dates and delays the trial in any manner, his bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse. (v) That the Petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled.

¶10

(Anjana Prakash, J)

¶11

S.Ali

Ram Pyare Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Pyare Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Kumar Rai Vs The State Of Bihar

Neuri Manjhi and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Jainuddin Abedin @ Munna Vs The State Of Bihar

Ranjit Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Satrughan Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar

Jitendra Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar