Dismissed

Shailesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC15 Jun 2016CR. MISC./24824/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail petition, the Petitioner apprehended arrest in a case involving the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act, alleging false implication. The Hon'ble Court rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail, citing the petitioner's criminal antecedents. (Paragraph 10)

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 28 of 2016 stands rejected.

Shailesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24824 of 2016

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -28 Year- 2016 Thana -JAHANABAD District- JEHANABAD ====================================================== Shailesh Kumar, S/o Breaj Lal Yadav, Residence of Village- Eslam Cheak, P.S.- Kako, Dist- Jehanabad. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rashmi Kumari Mandilwar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Panday(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

¶4

2 15-06-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.

¶5

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 28 of 2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 326 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶6

There is allegation against the petitioner that he opened fire causing fire arm injury to the informant but submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the informant happens to be maternal brother-in-law of the petitioner and as a matter of fact, the maternal sister of the petitioner had lodged case against the informant and that is the reason of false implication of the petitioner in the present case.

¶7

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the

¶8

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24824 of 2016 (2) dt.15-06-2016

¶9

2/2

¶10

case as well as submissions of the parties and also taking notes of the fact that petitioner carries criminal antecedents of four cases, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 28 of 2016, stands rejected.

¶11

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶12

rohit/kunal/-

¶13

U T

Shailesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailesh 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

Bijay Kumar @ Bijay Kumar Singh @ Tuttu Vs The State Of Bihar

Yadunandan Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Shanti Devi Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Sanjeev Srivastava @ Sanjeev Vs The State Of Bihar

Lalu Mahto and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Sunil Kumar Pandit and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.