Petitioner challenged the anticipatory bail granted to Opposite Party No. 2 in a complaint case, alleging the current FIR was filed for the same reason as the earlier case.
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.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4374 of 2016 (2) dt.07-02-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.4374 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -51 Year- 2015 Thana -GANDHIMAIDAN District- PATNA
====================================================== Dharmendra Kumar Gupta Son of Shri Arjun Sao resident at Mamarkhabad English, P.O. Pandarakh, District - Patna
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Advocate For the State : APP
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER
2 07-02-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4374 of 2016 (2) dt.07-02-2017
the said Complaint Case. The petitioner has not made out a case that the OP No. 2 has in any manner committed default of the conditions upon which the anticipatory bail was granted to him.
(Vikash Jain, J)
Chandran/Ibrar
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has established sufficient grounds to set aside the anticipatory bail granted to the opposite party.
Dharmendra Kumar Gupta
The State of Bihar
Upendra Yadav @ Upendra Prasad Yadav
Vikash Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
