The High Court of Judicature at Patna dismissed a petition seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the opposite parties. The Court held that injuries were simple, the occurrence arose from a family dispute, and there was no proof of misusing the bail privilege.
The petition for cancellation of anticipatory bail was dismissed.
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.4749 of 2017
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -464 Year- 2016 Thana -BIHARSHARIF District- NALANDA
(BIHARSHARIFF)
======================================================
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lovekush Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand Tiwary
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER
The petitioner seeks cancellation of anticipatory bail allowed to Opposite parties No. 2 to 9 by order dated 14.12.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions judge-VI, Nalanda at Biharsharif, in ABP. No.2154 and ABP No. 2463 of 2016 arising out of Bihar P. S. Case No. 464 of 2016. The said Opposite parties are accused of commission of offence punishable under Sections 147,148,149,323,341,324,504,506,307,379 of the Indian
2
Penal Code.
From the impugned order, I find that the injuries were found to be simple in nature and the occurrence had taken place out of some family dispute. Exercise of discretion by the Court below granting bail to the Opposite parties cannot be said to be erroneous requiring interference by this Court. There is no proof of misuse of privilege of bail granted to the Opposite parties.
This application has no merit and it is, accordingly,
dismissed.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)
ArunKumar/-cs U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to the opposite parties requires interference by this Court.
Whether the learned Additional Sessions Judge erred in exercising discretion in granting bail.
Kamlesh Paswan
The State of Bihar
Babiya Devi
Karuna Devi
Mantu Paswan
Vikram Kumar
Chakradhari Sharan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
