Allowed

Pramod Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC26 Apr 2016CR. MISC./15772/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the petitioner in a case under s. 364 IPC and s. 16 UAP Act, directing his release upon furnishing bail bonds with sureties despite the presence of a confessional statement, noting lack of other substantive evidence against him.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge.

Pramod Kumar Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15772 of 2016 (3) dt.26-04-2016

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶4

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15772 of 2016

¶5

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -166 Year- 2014 Thana -JHAJHA District- JAMUI ====================================================== 1. Pramod Kumar Yadav Son of Chakkan Yadav Resident of Village - Bela, P.S.- Belhar, District - Banka .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar For the Opposite Party/s Mr. M.Rab(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 03/ 26.04.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned

¶6

Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶7

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under section 364A of the Indian Penal Code as well as section 16 U.A.P. Act.

¶8

Petitioner is not named in the first information report but in course of investigation, he was arrested. Learned Sessions Judge, Jamui referred paras 11, 12, 13 and 34 of the case diary to reject the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at para 11 of the case diary, place of occurrence has been described by the I.O and similarly, at para 12 of the case diary spy of the police disclosed the name of the petitioner and thereafter, I.O visited the clinic of one Dr. Afzal from where petitioner was arrested and the same was incorporated by the I.O at para 13 of the case diary. It is further stated that so far as para 34 of the case diary is concerned, the same is

¶10

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15772 of 2016 (3) dt.26-04-2016

¶11

¶12

confessional statement of the petitioner which was got recorded by the

¶13

I.O under coercion.

¶14

Moreover, petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail custody since 14.1.2016.

¶15

It would appear from the aforesaid submissions that except confessional statement as well as information of spy of the police, there appears to be nothing against the petitioner. Investigation against the petitioner has already been completed.

¶16

Accordingly, petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Jamui in UAP case no. 82A/2015 arising out of Jhajha P.S. Case no. 166/2014.

¶17

shahid

¶18

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)

¶19

U T

Pramod Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar Yadav 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

Shyam Kishore Rai and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Bhusan Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Kamaldeo Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Ram Pravesh Ram Vs The State Of Bihar

Tahir Khan and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Subodh Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar