Allowed

Sachin Kumar Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC26 Feb 2020CR. MISC./1593/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order in Criminal Miscellaneous application for anticipatory bail. Court allowed bail to four petitioners in a kidnapping case under section 366 IPC, requiring them to execute a bond with sureties and appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners ordered to appear before CJM Khagaria within six weeks and executed a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each.

Sachin Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1593 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2019 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria

¶3

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

¶4

Sachin Kumar Yadav Son of Prakash Yadav Resident of Village - Mahsaurhi, P.S.- Muffasil, District - Khagaria.

¶5

Nitish Kumar Yadav Son of Prakash Yadav Resident of Village - Mahsaurhi, P.S.- Muffasil, District - Khagaria.

¶6

Rahul Kumar Yadav Son of Prakash Yadav Resident of Village - Mahsaurhi, P.S.- Muffasil, District - Khagaria.

¶7

Prakash Yadav Son of Narayan Yadav Resident of Village - Mahsaurhi, P.S.Muffasil, District - Khagaria.

¶8

... ... Petitioner/s

¶9

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Binod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 26-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶12

APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioners have filed the instant application for anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection with Mansi P.S. Case no. 58 of 2019 registered for the offence under section 366 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

As per the allegation in the FIR, on the date of occurrence, five accused persons named in the FIR including the petitioner herein are said to have kidnapped the 19 year old married daughter of the informant.

¶15

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1593 of 2020(2) dt.26-02-2020 2/2

¶17

that the daughter of the informant returned and her statement was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C wherein she has disclosed her age as 19 year. She further disclosed that she had gone with the petitioner no. 1 willingly.

¶18

The application for bail has been opposed by learned APP for the State.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the above stated facts and circumstances, the Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender in the Court below within a period of six weeks from today in connection with Mansi P.S. Case no. 58 of 2019 are directed to be enlarged on bail on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria subject to the conditions as laid down in section 438(2) of Criminal Procedure Code.

¶20

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶21

Prakash/- U

Sachin Kumar Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Kumar Yadav 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

Usha Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Amar Nut Vs the State of Bihar

Arbind Kumar Chaudhary @ Arbind Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Baikunth Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Chhotu Yadav @ Chhotu Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Wakil Paswan Vs the State of Bihar