Single judge allowed an application for anticipatory bail to petitioners implicated in a case involving offences under the IPC and POCSO Act, releasing them on bail upon surrender and furnishing bonds subject to standard conditions.
Anticipatory bail granted; petitioners to appear as required; jail release upon surrender with ₹10,000 bonds.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.42428 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -135 Year- 2016 Thana -BAIRIYA District-
WESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH)
====================================================== 1. Parmanand Sah S/o Raghunath Sah 2. Sanjeev Kumar 3. Rajeev Kumar Both are Sons of Parmanand Sah. All are residents of village - Hat Saraiya, P.S. Bairiya, District - West Champaran….Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastva, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Umesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Prem Kumar Jha, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER
2 17-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
This application for grant of anticipatory bail arises out of Bairiya P.S. Case No. 135 of 2016, disclosing offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 354, 509 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, referring to the First Information Report, has submitted that no offence under the provisions of POCSO Act is made out against these petitioners on the basis of POCSO, on the basis of the allegation made in the First Information Report. It is his contention that the petitioners have been implicated because of pending land dispute between the father of the informant and the petitioner No. 1. Petitioners No. 2
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42428 of 2016 (2) dt.17-10-2016
2/2
and 3 are sons of petitioner No. 1. In this connection he has referred to statement made in paragraphs No. 9 and 10 of the present application.
Considering the submissions so advanced, this application is allowed.
Let the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge Ist-cum- Special Judge, West Champaran at Bettiah in connection with Bairiya P.S. Case No. 135 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
This is subject to the condition that the petitioners shall present themselves before the police/Court, as the case may be, as and when required and in the event of failure on their part to appear before the Court on two consecutive occasions, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)
Vats/-c U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioners implicated in an offence under the POCSO Act and other sections of the Indian Penal Code.
Whether the alleged involvement in a land dispute affects the grant of bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Parmanand Sah and Others
The State of Bihar
Chakradhari Sharan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
