Partly allowed

Vicky Kumar @ Vicky Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC1 Aug 2018CR. MISC./32645/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the petitioner's bail application in a POCSO case. It directed the petitioner to renew the prayer before the trial court if the trial is not concluded within four months. No bail was granted in this hearing.

What did the court decide?

Bail rejected. Liberty granted to renew bail prayer before the trial court if trial not concluded within four months.

Vicky Kumar @ Vicky Kumar Singh Vs The State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.32645 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -246 Year- 2016 Thana -MARHAURA District- SARAN

¶3

====================================================== Vicky Kumar @ Vicky Kumar Singh, Son of Prem Shankar Singh, Resident of Village- Pakahan, P.S.- Marhowrah, District- Saran.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

¶5

2 01-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶6

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 376-D of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4, 16 and 17 of POCSO Act.

¶7

Again, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail on the grounds mentioned by me in my previous order dated 11.11.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 38456 of 2016 and analogous cases and hence, his prayer for bail in connection with POCSO Case No. 19 of 2016 arising out of Marhowrah P.S. Case No. 246 of 2016 stands rejected.

¶8

However, it is informed that this court while rejecting the bail prayer of co-accused, Sanjit Kumar @ Bhola @

¶9

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32645 of 2018 (2) dt.01-08-2018

¶10

2/2

¶11

Sanjeet Kumar vide order dated 20.06.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 26846 of 2018 directed the trial court to conclude the trial of aforesaid co-accused within four months and liberty was granted to co-accused to renew his prayer for bail, if his trial is not concluded within the above stated period of four months. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that same observation may be given to petitioner also.

¶12

It is made clear that petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial court itself, if his trial is not concluded within the period as fixed by this court vide order dated 20.06.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 26846 of 2018.

¶13

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

¶14

SHAHZAD/-

¶15

U T

Vicky Kumar @ Vicky Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vicky Kumar @ Vicky Kumar Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

In The Goods Of Late Chhathu Lla Sahu Keshari Vs Xx

In The Goods Of Late Pritish Chandra Mitra Vs .

Seikh Md. Aihussain Vs Zainul and Ors.

Md. Rashid @ Pappu Vs The State Of Bihar

Ragho Mistry @ Raghav Mistry Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Smt. Sita Jha Vs Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh and Ors.