Allowed

Neeraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC10 Apr 2017CR. MISC./12124/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the petitioner who was a late add-on accused in a kidnapping/robbery case. He was not named in the FIR initially but was implicated during investigation with recovery of the victim's motor cycle.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the JM-II, Buxar in PS Case No. 64/2016.

Neeraj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.12124 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -64 Year- 2016 Thana -ITARHI District- BUXAR

¶3

====================================================== 1. Neeraj Kumar, S/o Sri Umesh Singh, Resident of Village- Tilakpura, P.S.- Dawath, District- Rohtas.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

The State of Bihar

¶6

Versus .... .... Opposite Party/s

¶7

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ram Sevak Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 10-04-2017 Heard both sides.

¶9

The petitioner seeks bail in Itarhi P.S. case No. 64 of 2016 under Section 307, 379, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶10

The informant named six persons, namely, Arvind Yadav, Anuj Sah, Shivjee Chauhan, Akhilesh Pathak, Vishwanath Yadav and Girij Yadav and alleged that Anuj Yadav exhorted and, on such, Arvind Yadav fired in which informant got injuries. Shivji Chauhan, Akhilesh Pathak with Vishwanath Yadav and Girij Yadav took away motor cycle of the informant.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner surfaced in the case during the course of investigation. The motor cycle of

¶12

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12124 of 2017 (3) dt.10-04-2017

¶13

2/2

¶14

the informant was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and after completion of investigation charge sheet under Section 395, 397, 412 of the IPC was submitted against the petitioner and other accused persons.

¶15

It appears that informant has not made any specific allegation against the petitioner. Similarly situated accused Chanchal Mishra has already been granted bail vide order passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3730 of 2017.

¶16

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation made against the petitioner, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Buxar in Itarhi P.S. Case No. 64 of 2016.

¶17

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶18

BKS/-

¶19

U T

Neeraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Kumar 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

Md. Mehraj @ Mehraj Vs The State Of Bihar

Sonu @ Kanchhedia @ Chhedia Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajesh Sahani Vs The State Of Bihar

Ugranath Jha and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Md. Saddam Vs The State Of Bihar

Sintu Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar