Petitioner sought modification of lapsed provisional anticipatory bail conditions. Court held application infructuous as bonds were cancelled and bail period expired, dismissing the plea.
Application dismissed as infructuous due to lapsed bail and cancelled bonds.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.2902 of 2017
======================================================
Pradeep Kumar Singh, S/o Baidhyanath Singh, Resident of Village - Raipur, P.S. - Ujiarpur, District - Samastipur.
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Mustaque Alam, APP
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
3 03-05-2017 The present application has been filed for modification of the order dated 30.05.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 24132 of 2016 to the extent that now the petitioner is not ready to keep the complainant.
The petitioner being the husband of the complainant was granted provisional anticipatory bail by order dated 30.05.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 24132 of 2016 on undertaking that the petitioner is ready to keep the complainant as wife with full honour and dignity. A statement to that effect has been made in para 9 of the said petition which reads as “That the petitioner is ready to keep the complainant with full honour and dignity” and the provisional bail of the petitioner will be confirmed by learned court below on three eventualities (i) if the matrimonial harmony
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2902 of 2017 (3) dt.03-05-2017
2/2
is substantially restored or (ii) if the complainant fails to appear before the learned court below or (iii) if the complainant gets reluctant to reconcile the issue.
Learned counsel for the complainant submits that bail bonds of the petitioner has already been cancelled. Moreover the provisional bail was for a period of four months which got lapsed on 29.09.2016.
In view of the fact that the prayer for modification of condition of bail has become infructuous, the application is dismissed as having become infructuous.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)
Prakash/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application for modification of anticipatory bail conditions is maintainable when the existing bail has lapsed and bonds are cancelled.
Pradeep Kumar Singh
The State of Bihar
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
