The High Court confirmed the provisional anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner. The Supreme Court forwarded a no-antecedent report from the concerned Superintendent of Police.
The provisional bail granted on 18.12.2015 is confirmed and the application for anticipatory bail is allowed.
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.55016 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -49 Year- 2015 Thana -CHENARI District- SASARAM (ROHTAS)
====================================================== Umesh Tiwari, Son of Late Rajdeo Tiwari, Resident of village - Lili, P.S. Karamchat, District – Kaimur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arabind Nath Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.N.Shukla, APP Mr. Brajesh Kumar, AC to AAG-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 6 29-06-2016 Heard Mr. Arbind Nath Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and Mr. Brajesh Kumar, learned Assisting Counsel to Additional Advocate No.11 who has been specifically requested by the Bench to assist the Court in the matter vide order passed on 18.5.2016. The petitioner is an accused in a case arising from Chenari P.S. Case No.49 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under sections 384, 385, 386, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Apprehending his arrest that the present application for grant of anticipatory bail was filed and was considered on 18.12.2015 and when this Court while granting provisional bail to the petitioner required a report from the Superintendent of Police as regarding the antecedent of the petitioner. Since the station of the Superintendent of Police was incorrectly mentioned in the order that it has been
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55016 of 2015 (6) dt.29-06-2016
2
modified by the subsequent order passed on 20.1.2016.
Since despite the order of this Court that the antecedent report of the petitioner was not coming from the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram that this Court vide order passed on 18.5.2016 made a request to Mr. Kumar to assist the Court and to submit report as regarding the antecedent of the petitioner with clear stipulation that if the report is not received by the next date then this Court would be constrained to seek the appearance of the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram.
Today when the matter is taken up Mr. Brajesh Kumar, hands over a report submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram in which it is stated that the petitioner is not accused in any other case except this case.
In that view of the matter, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner vide order passed on 18.12.2015 is hereby confirmed and this application is accordingly allowed.
Let the report furnished by the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram be kept on record of the proceedings and before parting I would record my appreciation for the assistance provided by Mr. Brajesh Kumar, learned Assisting Counsel to Additional Advocate General No.11.
SKPathak/-
U T
(Jyoti Saran, J)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the provisional anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner pending antecedent report should be confirmed after receipt of the report.
Whether the petitioner has any other pending criminal antecedents against which bail might be unsafe.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Umesh Tiwari
The State of Bihar
Jyoti Saran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
