Dismissed

Raju Singh @ Raju Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC3 Jul 2019CR. MISC./36/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a modification application seeking to extend the surrender period under anticipatory bail granted on merits. The petitioner was informed they needed to surrender; the court declined interference due to the delay between grant and application but allowed future regular bail prayer upon surrender.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; petitioner directed to seek regular bail within six weeks upon surrender.

Raju Singh @ Raju Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36 of 2019

¶2

¶3

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13158 of 2015

¶4

Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District-

¶5

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

¶6

Raju Singh @ Raju Kumar Son of Umesh Sihgh Resident of village- Dulpat Bishanpur, P.S.- Dhaka, district- East Champaran Motihari

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Usha Kumari-1 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Smt Pushpa Sinha ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 03-07-2019

¶13

Heard learned counsels for the parties.

¶14

The present application has been filed for modification of the order dated 30.3.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No.13158 of 2015 to the extent of extending the period of surrender and executing the bail bonds.

¶15

The petitioner preferred Cr. Misc. No. 13158 of 2015 with a prayer for anticipatory bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 384,406 and 420/34of the IPC and was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 30.3.2015.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could not surrender since he was not informed about the anticipatory bail being granted to him.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36 of 2019(2) dt.03-07-2019 2/2

¶18

Considering the fact that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail on 30.3.2015 and the present modification application has been registered on 4.1.2019, this Court is not inclined to interfere.

¶19

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶20

However, considering the fact that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail on merits, it is a case for consideration of prayer of the petitioner for regular bail in case the petitioner surrenders and prays for bail within a period of six weeks in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 529 of 2011 pending in the Court of the learned CJM, Madhepura.

¶21

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶22

anil/-

¶23

Raju Singh @ Raju Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Singh @ Raju Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sujeet Kumar Mahto Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Rashmi Priyadarshani Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Rajeev Paswan Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Md. Gulam @ Gulam Rasool and Ors. Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar