Partly allowed

Baiju Pandey @ Baiju Kumar Pandey and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC18 Dec 2018CR. MISC./75065/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application under CrPC 438, the Court granted bail to petitioners 2 and 3, who face charges of extortion and molestation, due to their clean antecedents. For petitioner 1 and 4, the application was dismissed due to pending cases, directing regular bail consideration if surrendered.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted for petitioners 2 and 3 subject to deposit of Rs 10,000 each with two sureties; anticipatory bail application dismissed for petitioners 1 and 4 with direction to grant regula

Baiju Pandey @ Baiju Kumar Pandey and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.75065 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2014 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Baiju Pandey @ Baiju Kumar Pandey, Son of Late Sanphi Pandey, Resident of Village- Balwa, P.S.- Pipra, District- East Champaran at present Government Electrician, Chhatauni Feeder, Motihari.

¶5

Naresh Pandey @ Naresh Das, Son of Late Mahesh Das, Resident of Village- Bada Bariyarpur, P.S.- Chhatauni, DistrictEast Champaran.

¶6

Sushil Kumar, Son of Late Banwari Prasad, Resident of VillageBhawanipur Zirat, P.S.- Chhatauni, District- East Champaran.

¶7

Arun Kumar @ Arun Kumar Amar, Son of Ram Parvesh Rajak, Resident of Manaddi Nagar, P.S.- Mahaddi Nagar, DistrictSitamarhi, posted as Electrical Engineer.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶12

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Bhardwaj For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Panchanand Pandit ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 18-12-2018

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶16

counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

¶17

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Trial No. 2279 of 2017 arsing out of Complaint Case No.237 of 2014 for the offence under Sections 406, 420 and 504, of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners No. 2 and 3 have no criminal antecedent. Referring to the instant case, he submits that allegation is that they have

¶19

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.75065 of 2018(2) dt.18-12-2018 2/3

¶20

disconnected the electricity connection and demanded rupees two lacs and on deposit of Rs.6000/- they have restored the electricity connection. Further allegation is that they have issued receipt of Rs. 2900/- instead of Rs.6000/-.

¶21

Considering the fact that the incident is of year 2013 whereas the complaint was filed in the year 2014 and also the fact that petitioner No. 2 and 3 have no criminal antecedent, let the petitioners No. 2 and 3 above named, in the event of arrest or surrender within one month from today, be released 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 the Court of learned A.C.J.M. Patna City in connection with Trial No. 2279 of 2017 arising out of Complaint Case No. 237 of 2014 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶22

So far as petitioners No. 1 and 4 are concerned, there are certain cases pending against them, the Court is not inclined to grant indulgence to the petitioners No. 1 and 4. Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail is hereby dismissed. However, the dismissal of the anticipatory bail application will not cause prejudice to the petitioners No. 1 and 4 and in the event, the petitioners No. 1 and 4 surrender before the Court

¶23

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.75065 of 2018(2) dt.18-12-2018 3/3

¶24

below and prays for regular bail, the Court below is hereby directed to dispose of the application for regular bail of the petitioners No. 1 and 4 on the same day in accordance with law without being influenced by dismissal of this application.

¶25

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J)

¶26

T.Kr./-

¶27

U T

Baiju Pandey @ Baiju Kumar Pandey and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baiju Pandey @ Baiju Kumar Pandey and Ors. 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

Kin Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Dhanamuni Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Gopal Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Prem Shankar Mandal Vs The State Of Bihar

Mohan Yadav and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Bimal Kumar @ Bimal Sah Vs The State Of Bihar