Allowed

Lalit Kumar Yadav @ Lalit v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC28 Apr 2014CR. MISC./13471/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh quashed the Sessions Judge's order rejecting the petitioner's request to extend the surrender period for anticipatory bail in a dowry and cruelty case, directing the lower court to allow a reasonable time and modify conditions considering the petitioner's Railway employment.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order was quashed; the petitioner was directed to surrender and execute the bail bond within a reasonable time with modified conditions.

Lalit Kumar Yadav @ Lalit Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.13471 of 2014

¶2

====================================================== Lalit Kumar Yadav @ Lalit Son Of Naresh Yadav Resident Of VillageKothiya, P.S- Kako, District- Jehanabad. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Puja Devi Daughter of Late Nanhak Yadav Resident Of Village Karpi, P.S- Karpi, District- Arwal .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03/ 28-04-2014 The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 09.09.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jehanabad in A.B.P. No. 603 of 2013, whereby petitioner’s modification application dated 07.09.2013 for extending the period of surrender has not been allowed and the application was disposed of.

¶3

The petitioner being the elder brother of the husband of the complainant was granted anticipatory bail on 29.07.2013 in Complaint Case No. 485 of 2012 in which processes were directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Sections 498A of the IPC and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act with a direction to furnish bail bond within fortnight, but the petitioner could not furnish the bail bond and filed an application on 07.09.2013 for modification of order dated

¶4

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13471 of 2014 (3) dt.28-04-2014

¶5

¶6

29.07.2013 for extending the period of surrender and execution of bail bond, which was not allowed and the application was disposed of by learned Sessions Judge, Jehanabad on 09.09.2013.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a Railway employee and under a bonafide mistake he could not surrender and furnish bail bond within fortnight.

¶8

Considering nature of accusation and the fact that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail on merit, the order dated 09.09.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jehanabad in A.B.P. No. 603 of 2013 is quashed. It is expected from the learned court below to extend the period of surrender and allow the petitioner to furnish bail bond within a reasonable time. The learned court below may also consider to modify the condition of appearance on each and every date stipulated in the order dated 29.07.2013 keeping in view of the fact that the petitioner is an employee of the Railway.

¶9

With the above observation, this application is disposed of.

¶10

Let the order be transmitted to the learned court below through fax at the cost of the petitioner.

¶11

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶12

DKS/-

Lalit Kumar Yadav @ Lalit v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Kumar Yadav @ Lalit v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ayub Ali @ Qamar Khan Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Farooque and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Bhagwat Singh and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Raj Kumar Mahton and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Chintu Kumar @ Chintu Pandey Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Anil Kumar Agrawal Vs The State Of Bihar