Allowed

Rajiv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC10 Nov 2015CR. MISC./50675/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of two criminal miscellaneous applications seeking bail. Holding that the petitioners had been in custody for about six months, the court granted bail with specific conditions regarding sureties and appearance.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties of like amount each and ensuring one bailor is their father.

Rajiv Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.50194 of 2015

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -353 Year- 2015 Thana -HAJIPUR District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Pappu Kumar, Son of Jawahir Manjhi, resident of village - Anjani Sikti, P.S. Parsa, District - Saran at Chapra .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== With Criminal Miscellaneous No.50675 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -353 Year- 2015 Thana -HAJIPUR District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Rajiv Kumar, son of Upendra Ram, resident of village Ambedkar Nagar Colony, P.S. Hajipur Town, District Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : (In Cr.Misc. No.50194 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Gopesh Kumar(App) (In Cr.Misc. No.50675 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate : Mrs. Anuradha Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 2 10-11-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. Both the applications arise out of Hajipur Town P.S. Case No.353 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 399, 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25 (1-b) a, 26 & 35 of the Arms Act, as such, they have been heard

¶3

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50194 of 2015 (2) dt.10-11-2015

¶4

2/3

¶5

together and are being disposed of by this common order.

¶6

It is alleged that the petitioners and other co-accused were apprehended by the police while they were assembled for making preparation for committing dacoity and from the possession of the petitioner Pappu Kumar, a loaded country made pistol and a live cartridge were recovered whereas from the possession of the petitioner Rajiv Kumar, a loaded country made pistol and two live cartridges were recovered.

¶7

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they have already been in custody for about six months. So far as the petitioner Rajeev Kumar is concerned, it has been stated that he does not have any criminal antecedent. So far as the petitioner Pappu Kumar is concerned, it has been stated that he is involved in four cases in which, he is on bail.

¶8

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners, namely, Pappu Kumar and Rajiv Kumar are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No.353 of 2015, with a further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioners must be their father.

¶9

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50194 of 2015 (2) dt.10-11-2015

¶10

3/3

¶11

Further, the petitioners shall remain present on each and every date during the course of concerned proceeding. If the petitioners fail to remain present on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation then the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.

¶12

Further, if the petitioners, after their release in this case, are again found to be involved in criminal case of similar nature, the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.

¶13

(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)

¶14

V.K. Pandey/-

¶15

U T

Rajiv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv 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

Subodh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Madan Mohan Roy Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Munna Jaiswal Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Hare Ram Chauhan and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Lal Jha @ Red Jha @ Red Mishra @ Lal Kumar Jha Vs The State Of Bihar

Rahul Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar