Allowed

Sahin @ MD Sahin Akram v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC13 Jul 2016CR. MISC./8617/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This oral order granted bail to the petitioner accused of assault causing death. The court noted only one head injury, suggesting an intention akin to section 304 IPC rather than murder. Bail was granted with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties of Rs. 10,000 each, subject to attending trial and not tampering with evidence or witnesses for six months.

Sahin @ MD Sahin Akram Vs The State Of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.8617 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -57 Year- 2015 Thana -PAKARIBARAW District- NAWADA ====================================================== SAHIN @ MD SAHIN AKRAM .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hansraj For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md.Nazir Ansari (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 3 13-07-2016 Heard. Earlier, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 02.11.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 33746 of 2015 but the petitioner is in jail custody since 29.05.2015 and according to the report of trial court up till now, only six prosecution witnesses, out of 11 proposed prosecution witnesses, could be examined. The trial of the petitioner is still pending for recording the prosecution evidence.

¶3

It would appear from perusal of the first information report that petitioner assaulted the deceased with butt of gun and the post mortem report of the deceased goes to show that only one injury was found on the head of the deceased.

¶4

Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the aforesaid fact goes to show that there was no intention of the

¶5

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8617 of 2016 (3) dt.13-07-2016

¶6

2/2

¶7

petitioner to kill the deceased and, therefore, at best the petitioner could be prosecuted under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Pakribarawan (Dhamaul) P.S.Case No. 57 of 2015, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall attend the trial court in person for the period of six months or till conclusion of his trial, which ever is earlier, and if he fails to do so and shall make any attempt to terrorize the prosecution witnesses or to temper with the prosecution evidence, the concerned court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after due and proper inquiry.

¶8

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

¶9

N.K/-

¶10

U T

Sahin @ MD Sahin Akram v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahin @ MD Sahin Akram 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

Binod Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Anuj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajiv Ranjan and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Kavita Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Foolena Sah Vs The State Of Bihar

Suman Kumar @ Suman Paswan and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar