Allowed

Vikram Kumar and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC4 Dec 2017CR. MISC./56370/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to two petitioners accused of offences under sections 272 and 273 of IPC and section 30(A) of BPA 2016. The court considered the false accusation of liquor recovery, clean antecedents, and custody duration in filing ₹10,000 bail bonds each.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties of the like amount to the Additional District and Sessions Judge II.

Vikram Kumar and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.56370 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-383 Year-2017 Thana- MAJORGUNJ District- Sitamarhi

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Vikram Kumar, Son of Lakshman Mehata,

¶5

Bimlesh Kumar, Son of Kodai Bhandari, Both are residents of Village- Rewasi Pakari, Ward No.10, Police Station- Riga, District- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner/s : Sri Uday Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Sri Ram Sevak Choudhary

¶12

======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 04-12-2017

¶15

Heard Sri Uday Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ram Sevak Choudhary, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶16

Two petitioners, who are in custody since 14.09.2017 in connection with Majorgunj P.S. Case No. 383 of 2017 registered for offence under section 272, 273 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and section 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act , 2016 have prayed for grant of bail.

¶17

It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that on false accusation of recovery of about 45 liters of Nepali Sofi country made liquor both the petitioners were apprehended. It has been argued that besides this the petitioners are having clean antecedent , which fact has been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the

¶18

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56370 of 2017(2) dt.04-12-2017 2/2

¶19

petition.

¶20

Considering the nature of accusation, clean antecedent and period of custody of petitioners, let both the petitioners Vikram Kumar and Bimlesh Kumar be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- ( ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge II –cum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Sitamarhi / concerned court in connection with Majorgunj P.S. Case No. 383 of 2017.

¶21

(Rakesh Kumar, J)

¶22

praful/-

¶23

U T

Vikram Kumar and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram Kumar and Anr. 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

Smt. Pragati Raj Vs Shishir Kumar

Pappu Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Munna Kumar @ Raj Kumar Verma and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Binod Ram @ Binod Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Sadhu Dom Vs The State Of Bihar

Upendra Kumar Singh @ Upendra Singh Vs The State Of Bihar