Allowed

Sunil Prasad @ Sunil Kumar and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC10 May 2016CR. MISC./18091/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bail application was filed against two accused persons charged with assault, theft, and murder. The court allowed bail for eight weeks subject to furnishing bonds, citing a pending land dispute and a counter case as factors.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail for eight weeks upon furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya.

Sunil Prasad @ Sunil Kumar and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.18091 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -113 Year- 2015 Thana -CHANDAULI District- GAYA

¶3

====================================================== 1. Sunil Prasad @ Sunil Kumar, Son of Budhan Prasad, 2. Dinesh Prasad, Son of Late Ramkeshwar Prasad, Both Resident of Village- Kaujapi, Police Station- Chanduti, District- Gaya.

¶4

.... .... Petitioners Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr. Kundan Kumar For the Opposite Party : Mr. A.L.Pandit (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER

¶5

2 10-05-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

¶6

Petitioners apprehend his arrest in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 113 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶7

The Allegation is that these two petitioners along with four others named in the F.I.R. brutally assaulted the informant when he was weighing vegetables in his shop and in course thereof also committed theft of Rs. 5,000/- cash.

¶8

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that they are innocent, having no criminal antecedent and have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. The injury

¶9

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18091 of 2016 (2) dt.10-05-2016

¶10

2/2

¶11

of the informant cannot be attributed to the petitioners and the injury has been found to be simple in nature except injury No.2 which is swelling on the right arm which has been found to be grievous. He further submits that the land dispute is going on between the parties in Title Suit No. 03 of 2011 pending in the Court of Munsif 1^st , Gaya and there is a counter case filed by the wife of petitioner No.2 bearing Chandauti P.S. Case No.114 of 2015 in which after investigation has been found true.

¶12

However, the learned APP for the State submits that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. hence, opposes the prayer for bail.

¶13

Be that as it may, since there is a land dispute and counter case, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 113 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶14

(Nilu Agrawal, J.)

¶15

Rajiv/U T

Sunil Prasad @ Sunil Kumar and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Prasad @ Sunil Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karu Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Santosh Kumar and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Zawed @ Zawed Vs The State Of Bihar

Ish Mohammad Mian @ Ish Mohammad and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Rambabu Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Abhishek Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar