Allowed

Mukul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC12 Nov 2014CR. MISC./41056/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner applied for bail in case involving robbery and arms offenses. The court granted bail, noting the petitioner appeared only in a co-accused's confessional statement with no FIR or incriminating evidence against him, ordering release on surety bonds.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount.

Mukul Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

	IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.41056 of 2014
	Arising Out of PS.Case No. -63 Year- 2013 Thana -BADHAILA District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================
	Mukul Kumar Son of Suresh Singh resident of Village Pachhar, P.S. Baghaila (Rjpur) District - Rohtas
	.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ======================================================
	Appearance :
	For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ Manu, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ======================================================
	CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
2	12-11-2014 Heard both sides.
	The petitioner, Mukul Kumar seeks bail in Baghaila
	P.S. Case No. 63 of 2013 registered for the offences
	punishable under Sections 394 of the Indian Penal Code
	and 27 of the Arms Act.
	The informant alleged that while he was going after
	withdrawing of Rs. 1,67,000/- from a Bank some
	miscreants chased him and looted away his belongings and money.
	Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that name
	of the petitioner figured in the case only in the

¶2

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41056 of 2014 (2) dt.12-11-2014

¶3

2/2

¶4

confessional statement of another co-accused namely, Krishna Thakur who have already been enlarged on bail in Cr. Misc. No. 26027 of 2014.

¶5

Learned Additional PP however, did not dispute the facts.

¶6

Having considered the fact that the name of the petitioner figured in the case only in confessional statement of the co-accused and neither T.I.P. has been held nor any incriminating articles was recovered from the possession of the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Baghaila P.S. Case No. 63 of 2013.

¶7

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶8

Prakash/U T

Mukul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukul 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

Nagendra Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Ranjay Ram Vs The State Of Bihar

Pintoo Sahni Vs The State Of Bihar

Raju Chouhan Vs The State Of Bihar

Manis Bharadwaj Vs The State Of Bihar

Upendra Rai Vs The State Of Bihar