Anil Rai v. The State Of Bihar
Case brief
What is this about?
This is an oral order dismissing a petition seeking quashing of a warrant of arrest following cancellation of bail. The court found no grounds for interference.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 9901 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -186 Year- 2011 Thana -DARIYAPUR District- SARAN ====================================================== Anil Rai S/o Late Ram Adhodhya Rai resident of Village Rampur Jaiti, P.S. Dariyapur, District- Saran. .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh-1 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajiv Nayan(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2. 05-08-2016 Heard Sri Aditya Narayan Singh-I, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.
The petitioner, who was earlier granted bail by this Court, has approached this Court invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to quash an order dated 27-04-2015 passed in Sessions Trial No. 211 of 2013 (arising out of Dariyapur P.S. Case No. 186 of 2011), whereby after cancelling bail-bond of the petitioner, the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge – 11, Saran at Chapra has directed for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner.
On perusal of the impugned order i.e. order dated 27-04-2015, it is evident that framing of charge has been delayed
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9901 of 2016 (2) dt.05-08-2016
2/2
due to non-appearance of petitioner. After going through the impugned order, I do not find any ground for interference. The petition stands dismissed.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Anil Rai
- respondent
The State of Bihar
Coram
Rakesh Kumar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court