Allowed

Rupesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC22 Mar 2017CR. MISC./12786/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous matter, the Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner, Rupesh Kumar, who had been re-arrested after failing to appear in court for his witness's examination. The court directed him to furnish a bail bond with specific conditions attached.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount each, subject to conditions.

Rupesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12786 of 2017 (2) dt.22-03-2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Criminal Miscellaneous No.12786 of 2017

¶4

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -226 Year- 2014 Thana -MITHANPURA District- MUZAFFARPUR

¶5

====================================================== Rupesh Kumar, son of Rajendra Prasad Yadav, resident of Village- Jadiya, P.S.- Jadiya, District- Supaul.

¶6

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Harish Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶7

2 22-03-2017 Heard both sides.

¶8

The petitioner seeks bail in Mithanpura P.S. Case No. 226/2014, registered for the offences punishable under Section 366(A) and other sections of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

The petitioner was on bail, but his bail bond was cancelled because the petitioner did not appear on 23.06.2016 when official witness was present in court for examination.

¶10

It is submitted that wife of the petitioner fell ill and therefore, the petitioner could not appear in the court. The petitioner was arrested on 03.02.2017. The petitioner has already remained in jail for one and half months.

¶11

Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond

¶12

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12786 of 2017 (2) dt.22-03-2017

¶13

of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge XIth, Muzaffarpur in connection with Mithanpura P.S. Case No. 226/2014, subject to the condition that one of the bailor shall be the father or mother of the petitioner and if the petitioner defaults in appearance on any date without plausible explanation, the learned court below shall cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.

¶14

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.)

¶15

Vinita/U T

Rupesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupesh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Kumar @ Gabbar Vs The State Of Bihar

Kunal Mahto Vs The State Of Bihar

Mithilesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Chhatri Sada Vs The State Of Bihar

Raj Kumar Matho @ Raj Kumar and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Ashish Kumar @ Anshu @ Aashu Vs The State Of Bihar