Allowed
Sanjay Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar
Patna HCCR. MISC./3965/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Cr.Misc. No.3965 of 2016 (2) dt.15-02-2016…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3965 of 2016 (2) dt.15-02-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.3965 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -10 Year- 2012 Thana -RUNISAIDPUR District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Sanjay Manjhi Son of Ramjee Manjhi, Resident of Village - Subhaigarh, P.S. - Runnisaidpur, District - Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Virendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. D.P.Tiwary(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 2 15-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 10 of 2012 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 379, 435, 427 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 17 of C.L.A. Act.
The petitioner is not named in the First Information Report and his name transpired during the course of investigation. Submission is of false implication and that in this case similarly situated co-accused Satish Kumar @ Satish Ram has been allowed bail vide Cri. Misc. 18543 of 2015 by another Bench of this Court and the petitioner suffering in custody since
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3965 of 2016 (2) dt.15-02-2016
21.09.2015, also deserves sympathetic consideration.
The learned A.P.P. is not in a position to distinguish the case of the petitioner from that co-accused.
In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner, above named, is also directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Learned C.J.M., Sitamarhi in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 10 of 2012 subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J)
sushma/U T
Sanjay Manjhi
The State of Bihar
Jitendra Mohan Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court