Allowed

Manjesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC16 Aug 2017CR. MISC./15032/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In criminal miscellaneous proceedings regarding an IPC robbery accusation, the Patna High Court granted bail to the accused petitioner under Section 392 and 412 IPC, directing him to furnish a monetary bond and secure two sureties upon appearing before the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of Rs. 10,000 each.

Manjesh Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15032 of 2017 (4) dt.16-08-2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15032 of 2017

¶4

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -651 Year- 2015 Thana -MADHEPURA District- MADHEPURA

¶5

====================================================== Manjesh Yadav, Son of Dinesh Yadav, Resident of Village- Godhiyari, P.S. & District- Madhepura.

¶6

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinesh Prasad Verma, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER

¶7

4 16-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶8

The petitioner is accused in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 651 of 2015, registered under Sections 392 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

The accusation is that, on 08.12.2015, the informant, Roushan Yadav, was coming to his house boarding on his Hero Splender Plus motorcycle. In the way, four persons came near the informant on two pulsar motorcycles in black and read colour and surrounded him. At that time, they took cash of Rs.10,000/- from his pocket and also snatched his motorcycle on the point of pistol. Thereafter, the informant came to know that four persons, namely, Rahul Singh, Garkan Yadav, Manjesh Yadav (petitioner) along

¶10

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15032 of 2017 (4) dt.16-08-2017

¶11

with one person came at Ganesh Asthan with black and read colour pulsar motorcycles and taking liquor and both motorcycles are belonging to Rahul Kumar and Garkan Yadav. The informant raised suspicion that Rahul Singh, Garkan Yadav, Manjesh Yadav (petitioner) along with one person looted his motorcycle.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would appear from the F.I.R. that the informant has detailed the physique of the culprits, who indulged in looting of cash and other material and motorcycle, but the petitioner has not been put on T. I. Parade while he is in custody since 08.03.2016. It is further submitted that while petitioner is accused in 17 other cases, but in maximum cases, he has been acquitted or granted bail as detailed in paragraph 3 of the petition due to that reason the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Further submission is that nothing has been recovered from possession of the petitioner.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura, in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 651 of 2015. Out of two sureties, one surety must be the close relative of the petitioner, who will file an

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15032 of 2017 (4) dt.16-08-2017

¶15

affidavit showing his relation with the petitioner and further the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during the course of the trial in the court below. If the petitioner fails to remain present on two consecutive dates during the course of the trial without any reasonable cause being shown, the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

¶16

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)

¶17

Bhardwaj/-

¶18

U T

Manjesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjesh Yadav 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

Dhanilal Sah Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Indra Bhusan Singh @ Sudhir Kr. Singh and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Lalita Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Bibi Masiya Vs The State Of Bihar

Shiv Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Manoj Das Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.