Allowed

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Rai and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC19 Apr 2018CR. APP (SJ)/972/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against the refusal of anticipatory bail. The court observed general and omnibus nature of the FIR allegations and ordered the setting aside of the impugned order, directing the release of appellants on bail with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order refusing anticipatory bail set aside; appellants released on bail of Rs. 20,000 each with two sureties of like amount, subject to conditions.

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Rai and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.972 of 2018

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -41 Year- 2015 Thana -GAYGHAT District- MUZAFFARPUR

¶4

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

¶5

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Rai,

¶6

Nanhe Kumar @ Nanhe Rai. Both are Son of Ramanand Rai @ Ram Nandan Ray Resident of Village-Badeya, P.S. Gaighat, District-Muzaffarpur.

¶7

1. The State of Bihar		.... .... Versus	Appellant/s
		.... ....	Respondent/s
======================	===	=========================	=========
Appearance : For the Appellant/s For the Respondent/s ======================	: : ===	Mr. Rajive Ranjan Singh, Mr. Anand Kumar Mr. Shanti Bhushan Singh Mr. Binay Krishna (SPP 245) =========================	=========
CORAM: HONOURABLE ORAL JUDGMENT	MR.	JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
Date: 19-04-2018

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, against refusal of the prayer for anticipatory bail by the learned Xth Additional District & Sessions Judge- cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Muzaffarpur in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 41/2015 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 307, 323, 324, 354, 379, 427, 447 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections ¾ (i)(x) of the SC/ST Act.

¶10

15 persons are named in the F.I.R. and other 20 to 25 are unknown. The appellants are also named in the F.I.R. However, the

¶11

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.972 of 2018 dt.19-04-2018

¶12

2/2

¶13

allegation is of general and omnibus nature.

¶14

Considering the general and omnibus nature of allegation, let the appellants, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as condition that the appellants shall fully cooperate with the investigation and trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the appellants.

¶15

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.

¶16

(Birendra Kumar, J.)

¶17

Rakhi

¶18

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE	N.A.
UploadingDate	21.04.2018
Transmission Date	21.04.2018

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Rai and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Rai 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

Ravi Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Chandan Yadav @ Chandan Kumar Yadav @ Chandan Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Saddam Ansari Vs The State Of Bihar

Ghanshyam Kunwar @ Ghanshyam Prasad Kunwar and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Aftab Alam Vs The State Of Bihar

Surendra Kumar @ Sonu @ Surendra Kumar Sonu @ Sonu Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar