Oral order correcting clerical error in the appearance column of a prior bail rejection order by adding the informant's counsel's name.
Direction to insert the name of Mr. Ravi Ranjan as counsel for the informant in the order dated 16.8.2019.
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.17866 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2017 Thana- BAKHARI District- Begusarai
======================================================
MANOJ TANTI @ MANOJ KUMAR TANI
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate Counsel for the informant : Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate, For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Satya Nand Shukla, A.P.P. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER
6 29-08-2019
This case has come up under the heading ‘To Be
Mentioned’ at the instance of the counsel for the informant
Mr. Ravi Ranjan, learned Counsel for the informant submits that prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 16.8.2019 passed in connection with Bakhari P.S. Case No. 98 of 2017, but inadvertently, his name has not been mentioned in the Appearance column of the aforesaid order.
Let the name of counsel appearing on behalf of the informant be inserted and read as “For the informant : Mr. Ravi Ranjan” in the Appearance column of the order dated 16.8.2019.
(Sanjay Priya, J)
S.Ali/- U T
Manoj Tanti @ Manoj Kumar Tani
The State of Bihar
Sanjay Priya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
