Allowed

Badal @ Chandramohan v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Oct 2020CR. MISC./24340/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, accused in Sections 279 and 382 IPC Sakara PS Case No. 219 of 2019, sought bail renewal after six months elapsed since previous order allowed time limit. Court permitted bail release.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner's release on bail of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount each, one to be a close relative, to the satisfaction of ACJM-IV, Muzaffarpur, in PSP Case No. 219 of 2019.

Badal @ Chandramohan Vs the State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24340 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-219 Year-2019 Thana- SAKRA District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Badal @ Chandramohan, Son of Tapeshwar Sah, Resident of VillageSirajabad, P.S.- Sakra, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nachiketa Jha, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 06-10-2020

¶14

In view of the submission and undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioner, at the time of hearing of this application through Video Conferencing, that he would remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the stamp reporter, within two weeks of starting of the Court proceeding in physical mode, he is permitted to remove the same accordingly.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State through Video Conferencing.

¶16

The petitioner is accused in connection with Sakara P.S. Case No. 219 of 2019, registered under Sections 279 and 382 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24340 of 2020(2) dt.06-10-2020 2/2

¶19

dated 03.03.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 10202 of 2020 by this Court with an observation that petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after three months and now more than six months has already elapsed.

¶20

Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case and the observation made in the order dated 03.03.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 10202 of 2020, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the A.C.J.M.-IV, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Sakara P.S. Case No. 219 of 2019. Out of two sureties, one surety must be the close relative of the petitioner.

¶21

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)

¶22

Bhardwaj/-

¶23

U T

Badal @ Chandramohan v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badal @ Chandramohan 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

Mintu Giri Vs The State of Bihar

Kailash Prasad Gupta Vs The State of Bihar

Kusum Devi @ Kushum Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Pandey Vs The State of Bihar

Tuntun Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Abhijeet Kumar Singh @ Chhatu @ Abhijeet Kumar @ Chhotu Vs The State of Bihar