Allowed

Sandeep Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC10 Jul 2017CR. MISC./24375/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed the petitioner's application for regular bail in a Chapter5 IPC case. The court directed the petitioner to furnish a bail bond and two sureties on specified conditions, including the presence of a local surety with immovable property.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties of like amount; conditions include local surety with immovable property, no witness tampering, and availability for trial.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24375 of 2017

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -116 Year- 2016 Thana -DAUDPUR District- SARAN

¶4

====================================================== 1. Sandeep Kumar Son of Pradeep Prasad , R/o Village- Musahari, P.S.Daudpur, District- Saran at Chapura.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nirmal Kumar Sinha

¶7

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 10-07-2017 Heard the parties.

¶9

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Daudpur P.S.Case No.116 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Sections 395 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the case is under Section 395 of I.P.C.

¶11

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is absolutely nothing against the petitioner, no recovery and not put on T.I.P. It is also alleged that he was using looted SIM in the Mobile of his father, as such he has been made accused in this case and he has no criminal antecedent and remained in custody

¶12

for about 3 ½ months.

¶13

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24375 of 2017 (3) dt.10-07-2017

¶15

2/2

¶16

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Saran at Chapra in connection with Daudpur P.S.Case No.116 of 2016.

¶17

With following conditions :

¶18

(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned court.

¶19

(ii) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court and on the event of failure on his part to appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail.

¶21

With the aforesaid observation, this application is allowed.

¶22

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)

¶23

chn/U T

Sandeep Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep 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

Ram Chandra Ram and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Arbind Yadav @ Raju Da @ Rajo Da @ Raju Das Vs The State Of Bihar

Pradeep Bari @ Pradip Bari Vs The State Of Bihar

Amarjeet Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Munna @ Manoj Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajendra Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar