Allowed

Md. Rajjak and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC8 Mar 2019CR. MISC./34976/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners accused of escaping police custody in a separate case, citing Supreme Court precedent, subject to specific conditions regarding cooperation with investigation and court appearances.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail on bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation and attendance in court.

Md. Rajjak and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34976 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-18 Year-2012 Thana- KISHUNPUR District- Supaul *

¶3

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

¶4

Md. Rajjak, Son of Late Md. Kismat,

¶5

Md. Naushad, Son of Late Md. Salamat, Both are resident of Village- Wela Tedha, P.S.- Kishanpur, DistrictSupaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Smt. Pushpa Sinha ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER

¶12

6 08-03-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

¶13

The petitioners are renewing his prayer for pre-arrest bail on the terms that the main allegation against the petitioners was that the petitioners had escaped from the custody of the police by making use of other co-accused persons. Since, they have fled from the custody of the police, he is not entitled the privilege of bail.

¶14

The allegation against both the petitioners was that they had been involved in another case for which the police had gone to arrest and having escaped, they do not deserve the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34976 of 2018(6) dt.08-03-2019 2/3

¶16

Leaned counsel for the petitions submits that in view of the fact that both the petitioners undertake to appear in the Court below as and when required in both cases in which allegations have been levelled against them. He further submits that the petitioners may be extended the privilege of pre-arrest bail for which they are willing to co-operate with the prosecution and the Court below.

¶17

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State and considering the fact that a judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 2010 SC 1225 has stated that anticipatory bail application would be maintainable, let the petitioner No.1 and 2 in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, be released on anticipatory 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul, in connection with Kishanpur P.S. Case No.18 of 2012, subject to following condition :-

¶18

(1) One of the bailors will be their own blood relative, preferably, mother, brother, sister and/or their wife.

¶19

(2) The petitioners shall not indulge themselves in any

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34976 of 2018(6) dt.08-03-2019 3/3

¶21

similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

¶22

(3) The petitioners shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned.

¶23

(4) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make themselves available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶24

It is made clear that in the event, if the petitioners do not cooperate in the trial, it shall be open to the prosecution to take appropriate steps for cancellation of their bail.

¶25

(Anjana Mishra, J)

¶26

sanjeev/-

¶27

U T

Md. Rajjak and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Rajjak and Anr. 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satrajit Chaudhary @ Ajay Chaudhary @ Satarjit Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Baidnath Kherwar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Azam Vs The State of Bihar

Gopi Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Kumar Singh @ Sonu Vs The State Of Bihar

Ganga Mistri @ Ganga Sharma Vs The State of Bihar