Allowed

Sujit Kumar Tiwari @ Sujit Tiwari v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC20 Sept 2018CR. MISC./51939/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for an offence under Section 392 IPC, the Patna High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner. Although the looted motorcycle was recovered from his house, the court allowed bail noting his clean antecedent history and lack of involvement in the FIR, subject to a monetary bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Enlarged on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties of the like amount each.

Sujit Kumar Tiwari @ Sujit Tiwari Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.51939 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -52 Year- 2018 Thana -PATAHI District- EASTCHAMPARAN (MOTIHARI)

¶3

====================================================== Sujit Kumar Tiwari @ Sujit Tiwari S/o Late Amar Tiwari, resident of Village- Mahamada, P.S.- Patahi, District- East Champaran.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar, Advocate Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ramesh Chandra, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶5

2. 20-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶6

learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶7

Petitioner, in the present case, is seeking regular bail in connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 52/2018, G.R. No. 1625/2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report but the allegation is that the looted motorcycle was recovered from the house of this petitioner.

¶9

Learned counsel submits that even the fact that

¶10

this petitioner has no criminal antecedent and the vehicle in question has not been recovered from the conscious

¶11

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51939 of 2018 (2) dt.20-09-2018

¶12

¶13

possession of the petitioner, his prayer for bail may be considered at this stage.

¶14

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

¶15

State is present and opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case whereunder the petitioner having no criminal antecedent and the motorcycle is said to have been recovered from the house, wherein the petitioner claims that it was not recovered from his conscious possession, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned VIIIth A.C.J.M. East Champaran at Motihari, in connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 52/2018, G.R. No. 1625/2018, subject to condition as laid down under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶17

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶18

Rajeev/-

¶19

U T

Sujit Kumar Tiwari @ Sujit Tiwari v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujit Kumar Tiwari @ Sujit Tiwari 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

Umesh Seth Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Naushad Vs The State Of Bihar

Barkha Bharti @ Rubi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rupa Yadav and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Sogarath Paswan @ Ramswarth Paswan @ Ramsogarath Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Raushan Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar