Allowed

Amit Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC15 Mar 2017CR. MISC./3985/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowing a bail application in a robbery case (Sec. 392 IPC) where the petitioner had been in custody for over a year but was not named in the initial FIR and no incriminating articles were recovered. Ordered release on sufficient bail bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3985 of 2017

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -272 Year- 2015 Thana -AURANGABAD TOWN DistrictAURANGABAD

¶4

====================================================== Amit Yadav, son of Sheo Kumar Yadav, Resident of Village- Naya Tola, Jurabganj, P.S.- Korha, District- Katihar.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Parmanand Kumar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶7

3 15-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶8

The petitioner is languishing in custody since 23.11.2015 in connection with Aurangabad (Town) P.S. Case No. 272 of 2015 for the offences instituted under Section 392 of the IPC.

¶9

The prosecution story, in brief, is that while the informant alongwith one Chhotu Kumar were coming with five lacs cash by withdrawing from HDFC Bank, two pillion riders snatched the cash and fled away.

¶10

The earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected with liberty to renew his prayer for bail after completion of one year in custody. In light of the said observation, the present

¶11

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3985 of 2017 (3) dt.15-03-2017

¶12

2/2

¶13

application has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail.

¶14

A report was called for from the court below. It has been reported that the trial is not expected to be concluded in near future.

¶15

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 23.11.2015 i.e., for more than a year. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. There is no recovery of any incriminating article from possession of the petitioner.

¶16

On behalf of the State, it has been submitted that the name of the petitioner has come in course of investigation.

¶17

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Aurangabad in connection with Aurangabad (Town) P.S. Case No. 272 of 2015.

¶18

U.K./U T

¶19

(Sudhir Singh, J)

Amit Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit 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

Md. Shamshad @ Auwa @ Shamshad Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Monu Vs The State Of Bihar

Mohan Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Anil Mahto @ Anil Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Amit Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar