Dismissed

Satyendra Rai v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC3 May 2017CR. MISC./18222/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed an application for modification of an anticipatory bail order. The Court held the application was not maintainable as the provisional bail had lapsed, the lower court had already cancelled the bond, and the cancellation was not challenged.

What did the court decide?

The application for modification of the bail order was dismissed as it was not maintainable.

Satyendra Rai Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.18222 of 2017

¶2

====================================================== Satyendra Rai Son of Prabhu Rai, Resident of village - Piraukhar, P.S. Madhwapur, District - Madhubani

¶3

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Bihar

¶6

Priyanka Devi, Wife of Satyendra Rai, and daughter of Bundi Rai @ Munni Lal Rai, resident of village - Narayanpur, P.S. Pupri, District - Sitamarhi

¶7

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

¶8

====================================================== Appearance :

¶9

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Surendra Kumar, APP

¶10

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 03-05-2017 The present application has been filed for modification of the order dated 19.05.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3941 of 2016 by this Court.

¶12

The petitioner being husband of the complainant was granted provisional anticipatory bail for six months vide order dated 19.05.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3941 of 2016 with direction to the learned court below to get the issue mediated between the parties and on the issue being resolved through mediation, the provisional bail of the petitioner will be confirmed by the learned court below.

¶13

It appears from the order dated 30.01.2017 passed by the learned S.D.J.M, Pupri in Trial No. 1785 of 2016 that the issue

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18222 of 2017 (2) dt.03-05-2017

¶15

2/2

¶16

was not resolved and hence the bail bonds of the petitioner was cancelled.

¶17

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned court below did not take any steps to resolve the issue through meditation and in the meantime the O.P. No. 2 on 18.11.2016 filed an application before the S.D.J.M, Pupri, Sitamarhi with prayer to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner on the ground that dispute has not been resolved and the petitioner has already refused to keep her.

¶18

Considering the fact that the period of provisional bail of the petitioner got lapsed on 18.11.2016 and the present modification application got registered on 11.04.2017 moreover bail bond of the petitioner has already been cancelled and the same has not been challenged by the petitioner as a result this application is not maintainable, hence the same is dismissed.

¶19

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶20

Prakash/-

¶21

U T

Satyendra Rai v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyendra Rai v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

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

Bhishm Prasad Singh @ Bhishm Kumar Rai Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Dr. Binod Singh Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna

Bidya Nand Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Pradeep Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Samsad Alam @ Samshad Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Annu Kumari and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.