Dismissed

Ajay Tatwa @ Ajay kumar Tatwa v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC25 Jun 2020CR. MISC./10596/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was an oral order dismissing an anticipatory bail application. The judge held that since the petitioner's name emerged via co-accused confessional statements and one co-accused's bail was rejected, privilege of anticipatory bail could not be granted.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application dismissed; petitioner denied privilege of anticipatory bail.

Ajay Tatwa @ Ajay kumar Tatwa Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10596 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2019 Thana- SANDESH District- Bhojpur

¶3

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

¶4

AJAY TATWA @ Ajay kumar Tatwa S/o Vrij bihari Prasad R/o villageKamariya, P.S.- Ajimabad, District- Bhojpur (Ara) ... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Malti Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai ======================================================

¶6

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶7

2 25-06-2020

¶8

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶9

Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State, through Video Conferencing.

¶10

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Sandesh Police Station Case No. 29 of 2019, disclosing offences under Sections 394/307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶11

The prosecution case is that 3-4 persons arrived at the jewellery shop of the informant on 08.02.2019, at about 6 PM, and one of the accused fired upon the son of the informant, but the bullet missed the target and hit shutter of the shop. It has further been alleged that thereafter the accused persons demanded the bag from the informant and when the informant refused to give the bag, the accused persons fired upon the informant, which hit in his both thighs and the accused persons snatched his bag, containing cash, silver, golden ornaments, and

¶12

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10596 of 2020(2) dt.25-06-2020 2/2

¶13

fled away.

¶14

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report and his name has transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Nagesh Yadav and Shiv Ratan Yadav. She further submits that said two co-accused persons have been granted regular bail by this Court, by orders, dated 02.08.2018 and 27.06.2019, passed in Criminal Misc. Nos. 52127 and 43813 of 2019.

¶15

Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the name of the petitioner transpired in course of investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused persons, who have been granted regular bail by this Court and further that the anticipatory bail application of co-accused Aditya Kumar has been rejected by this Court by order, dated 21.08.2019, passed in Criminal Misc. No. 57105 of 2019, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶16

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶17

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)

¶18

Prabhakar Anand/-

Ajay Tatwa @ Ajay kumar Tatwa v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Tatwa @ Ajay kumar Tatwa 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

Raju Rai Vs the State of Bihar

Abdul Motalib Vs the State of Bihar

Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Shankar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Jai Prakash Gope Vs the State of Bihar

Dewan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Soni Kumari Vs The State of Bihar