Allowed

Rohit Prasad and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC22 Jan 2016CR. MISC./58544/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC arising from a case disclosing offences under Sections 304B and 201/34 IPC, the High Court allowed the application by analogy with a prior order where similarly situated accused persons were granted bail, directing the petitioners to surrender within six weeks on furnishing bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners allowed anticipatory bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance and cancellation if they fail to appear twice.

Rohit Prasad and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.58544 of 2015

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -82 Year- 2015 Thana -MAHARAJGANJ District- -Siwan ====================================================== 1. Rohit Prasad Son of Rambidhi Prasad 2. Pankaj Kumar Sharma Son of Paspati Sharma Both are residents of Village-Bagauchha, P.S. Maharajganj, District Siwan .... .... Petitioners Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶3

2 22-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶4

This application for grant of anticipatory bail arises out of Maharajganj P.S. Case No. 82 of 2015, disclosing offences under Sections 304B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 is the father-in-law of the deceased whereas, petitioner no.2 is simply a villager of petitioner no. 1 and not at all connected with the family of the husband of the deceased. He has drawn my attention to an order dated 24.07.2014 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 28448 of 2015 whereby, mother-inlaw and some other family members of the husband of the

¶6

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.58544 of 2015 (2) dt.22-01-2016

¶7

2/2

¶8

deceased have been granted anticipatorily bail.

¶9

In view of the submission that similarly situated accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail, this application is allowed.

¶10

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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in connection with Maharajganj P.S. Case No. 82 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶11

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.

¶12

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)

¶13

Vats/-

¶14

U T

Rohit Prasad and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Prasad and Anr. 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

Anjani Kumar Sinha Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Arbind Paswan Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Champa Kumari Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Pinki Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Nutan Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Vinod Ram Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.