The Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner in a PS Case involving offences under IPC and Excise Act. It held the bail cancellation was due to a communication gap and released him on new conditions.
Released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12786 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2013 Thana- SIWAN CITY District- Siwan
======================================================
VINOD CHAUDHARY S/o Subash Chaudhary @ Subash Resident of Village- Garwar, P.S.- Garwar, District- Balia (U.P.).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Bachan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 04-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner seeks bail in Siwan Town P.S. Case No. 14
of 2013 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 272, 273, 308 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 47(A) of the Excise Act.
This is a case of misuse of privilege of bail.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that earlier he was granted bail. Thereafter, he handed over his parivi to his parvikar and due to communication gap between the parvikar and the petitioner, his bail bond was cancelled on 30.10.2015. It has further been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he had gone outside the State in connection with his livelihood by entrusting the parivi of the case to the parvikar,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12786 of 2019(2) dt.04-04-2019 2/3
who left the parivi in the case as a result of which, his bail bond was cancelled but he was not informed about the same. When he came to his native place from the place of job, he surrendered in the present case on 21.12.2018 and since then he is in custody.
It has also been submitted that the petitioner undertakes to never misuse the privilege of bail in future.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge- 2nd -Cum-Special Judge, Siwan, in connection with Siwan Town P.S. Case No. 14 of 2013, with following conditions:-
(1)Bailors should be local having
sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.
(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court below.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12786 of 2019(2) dt.04-04-2019 3/3
(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
(S. Kumar, J)
manoj/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant bail to the petitioner who was wrongfully detained after his bail bond was cancelled due to lack of notice.
Vinod Chaudhary
The State of Bihar
S. Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
