In an anticipatory bail petition, the petitioner feared arrest for offences under IPC Sections 379, 364, and 302/34. The apex found the petitioner had participated in dismantling a vehicle and was not inclined to grant relief.
Anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.44029 of 2012 ====================================================== Sakaldeo Yadav .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 11-01-2013 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in Lakhisarai (Kabaiya) P.S. Case No. 121 of 2012 registered for the offences punishable under Section 379, 364 and 302/34of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai.
The informant’s driver took the auto rickshaw of the informant when he went traceless. Though, the petitioner was not named in the FIR but subsequently it has come during investigation that he also participated in dismantling the auto rickshaw.
This Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly the same is rejected.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)
Amrendra/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner facing charges of criminal breach of peace, kidnapping, and murder.
Whether the petitioner's alleged participation in dismantling the auto rickshaw warrants rejection of anticipatory bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sakaldeo Yadav
The State Of Bihar
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
