Allowed

Jaiki Chandravanshi @ Jaiki Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC7 Mar 2017CR. MISC./9809/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition filed seeking regular bail in a criminal trial for offences under Sections 302 and 201/34 IPC. The petitioner had been in custody following cancellation of bail due to absence. The court granted bail upon furnishing bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Directed to release the petitioner on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount to the Additional Sessions Judge, Patna.

Jaiki Chandravanshi @ Jaiki Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.9809 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -6 Year- 2012 Thana -GOPALPUR District- PATNA

¶3

====================================================== 1. Jaiki Chandravanshi @ Jaiki Kumar Son of Vijay Prasad @ Vijay Chandravanshi Resident of Village - Brahampur, P.S. Ram Krishna Nagar, District – Patna .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Adv. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Yogendra Kr. Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶4

2 07-03-2017

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶6

This is a petition for grant of regular bail for offences under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶7

This is a case of misuse of privilege of bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 870 of 2012 pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, VI, Patna, vide State of Bihar Vrs. Jaiki Chandravanshi @ Jaiki Kumar. Bail bond of the petitioner was cancelled on 21.12.2016 as the witness in attendance could not examine and cross examine due to absence of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner is in custody since 29.09.2016.

¶8

Submission of the petitioner is that the impugned order would reveal that liberty has been allowed to the petitioner to renew the prayer after examination of witness, Sarswati Devi. Sarswati Devi has

¶9

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9809 of 2017 (2) dt.07-03-2017

¶10

2/2

¶11

been examined and, thereafter, her evidence was deferred for further cross examination by six sets of accused, but, she is not appearing.

¶12

Considering the aforesaid fact, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Sessions Trial No. 870 of 2012 arising out of Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 6 of 2012 to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge, VI, Patna , or successor Court.

¶13

(Birendra Kumar, J)

¶14

SA/-

¶15

U √ T √

Jaiki Chandravanshi @ Jaiki Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaiki Chandravanshi @ Jaiki Kumar 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. Arti Devi @ Arti Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar

Satyendra Bhuiyan Vs The State Of Bihar

Lakhan Murmu Vs The State Of Bihar

Alha Choubey Vs The State Of Bihar

Chandan Sah Vs The State Of Bihar

Tinku Tiwary @ Tinkoo Tiwary Vs The State Of Bihar