Dismissed

Rajan Kumar Rajak @ Indal v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC29 Sept 2016CR. MISC./41648/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Patna rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in a case alleging offences under Sections 366 and 34 of the IPC. The court held that the allegation against the petitioner of illegally obtaining the case diary and interfering with the investigation precluded the grant of anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail rejected; petitioner directed to surrender within four weeks to seek regular bail.

Rajan Kumar Rajak @ Indal Vs The State Of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.41648 of 2016

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -38 Year- 2015 Thana -PIYAR District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== 1. Rajan Kumar Rajak @ Indal, Son of Late Bangali Rajak, Resident of Village- Matlupur, P.S.- Pear (Hatha O.P.), District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sangeeta Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶4

2 29-09-2016 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶5

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Pear (Hatha) Police Station Case No. 38 of 2015, disclosing offences under Section 366/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶6

Learned Counsel for the petitioner is in possession of the case diary of Pear (Hatha) Police Station Case No. 38 of 2015, which is a clear indication that the petitioner or his pairavikar has obtained the copy of the case diary through illegal means and is interfering or at least attempting to interfere with the course of investigation.

¶7

The petitioner does not deserve the privilege of

¶8

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41648 of 2016 (2) dt.29-09-2016

¶9

2/2

¶10

anticipatory bail on this ground alone.

¶11

This application for anticipatory bail is,

¶12

accordingly, rejected.

¶13

The petitioner, Rajan Kumar Rajak @ Indal, is directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised. If he does so, his application for regular bail shall be considered by the learned Court below on its own merit without being prejudiced by rejection of present application for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶14

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.)

¶15

Prabhakar Anand/-c

¶16

U √ T √

Rajan Kumar Rajak @ Indal v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajan Kumar Rajak @ Indal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Veena Devi and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Shankar Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Madho Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Saheb Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Udaykant Chaudhary and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Jhaksu Sahni and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar