Allowed

Raju and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC9 Oct 2015CR. MISC./42287/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted pre-arrest bail to three petitioners facing charges under various IPC sections arising from a parking dispute. The petitioners were ordered to surrender and provide a bail bond with sureties within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties upon surrender within four weeks.

Raju and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.42287 of 2015

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -73 Year- 2015 Thana -ANDER District- SIWAN

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Raju, Son of Bashisht Singh. 2. Sonu, Son of Harkesh Singh

¶5

Harkesh Singh @ Harikesh Singh @ Harikeshwar Singh Son of Late Ram Pukar Singh All are residents of Village- Bahelia, P.S. M.H. Nagar, District- Siwan.

¶6

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s

¶7

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kr.Singh(App)

¶8

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 09-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

¶10

The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Andar (M.H.Nagar) P.S. Case No. 73 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶11

It is contended that there is a case and counter case. Petitioner No.3 is full brother whereas Petitioners No.1 and 2 are nephews of the informant. The dispute arose between the parties due to parking of the vehicle. The injuries are mostly simple. It is further contended that the ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code would not be attracted

¶12

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42287 of 2015 (2) dt.09-10-2015

¶13

2/2

¶14

in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer

¶16

for bail.

¶17

Be that as it may, taking into consideration petty nature of dispute due to which the occurrence took place as also the fact that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks from today, the petitioners named above are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in connection with Andar (M.H.Nagar) P.S. Case No. 73 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶18

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

¶19

Pradeep/-

¶20

U T

Raju and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju and Ors. 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

Raj Kumar Singh and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Raushan Bhagat @ Raushan Kumar Bhagat and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Ranju Devi and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Neeraj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Madhav Sah and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Vikash Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.