Allowed

Pintu Yadav and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC22 Jun 2015CR. MISC./47961/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bench allowed an anticipatory bail petition filed by two brothers-in-law of a deceased. The court ordered their release on bail upon arrest or surrender within four weeks, subject to furnishing sureties and bonds under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted anticipatory bail to be released upon arrest/surrender within four weeks by furnishing Rs. 10,000 each as bond with two sureties.

Pintu Yadav and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47961 of 2014 (3) dt.22-06-2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47961 of 2014

¶4

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -85 Year- 2013 Thana -TARAPUR District- MUNGER ====================================================== 1. Pintu Yadav, son of Chakradhar Yadav, 2. Hira Yadav, Son of Chakradhar Yadav Both resident of Afjal Nagar, Khudiya, P.S. Tarapur, District- Munger .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamal Kishore Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 3 22-06-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Tarapur P.S. Case No. 85 of 2013 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioners happen to be brothers in law of the deceased, whose marriage had taken place ten years ago with coaccused, Pappu Yadav.

¶5

The contention on behalf of the petitioners is that coaccused, Pappu Yadav and some others have already been acquitted by the learned trial court and even if it assumed that the statements of witnesses recorded in course of trial of co-accused,

¶6

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47961 of 2014 (3) dt.22-06-2015

¶7

Pappu Yadav is not admissible in evidence in respect of the petitioners, then also, the above stated circumstance is sufficient to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioners.

¶8

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, this anticipatory bail petition is allowed and it is ordered that petitioners, in the event of their arrest/ surrender within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order to the court concerned, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger in Tarapur P.S. Case No. 85 of 2013 subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶9

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

¶10

SHAHZAD/-

¶11

U T

Pintu Yadav and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pintu Yadav and Anr. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Ziauddin @ Md. Ziyauddin Vs The State Of Bihar

Radhika Devi and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Abbas Hussain Vs The State Of Bihar

Suman Naut @ Suman @ Suman Kr. Khalipha and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Binod Sah Vs The State Of Bihar

Ramyad Sah Vs The State Of Bihar