Allowed

Mayank Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Jul 2022CR. MISC./10892/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition for bail, the Patna High Court granted release to the petitioner in cases of robbery, cheating, and assault. The court considered the victim's statement regarding consent and the petitioner's clean record before imposing standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties subject to standard conditions of cooperation and non-tampering.

Mayank Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10892 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2021 Thana- KAJRA District- Lakhisarai

¶3

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

¶4

MAYANK KUMAR S/O ASHOK KUMAR @ ASHOK MANDAL R/o village- Konan, P.S.- Sikandra, District- Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bharat Lal For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 11-07-2022

¶11

Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be

¶12

removed within a period of four weeks from today.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶14

A.P.P. for the State.

¶15

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kajra P.S. Case No. 85/2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 341, 366A, 379 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

As per prosecution case, the petitioner alongwith others entered in the house of the informant armed with various weapons and terrorized all family members and threatened to shoot them and looted 40,000/- cash and ornaments valued Rs.3,00000/- from the house of the informant and took away her daughter, Kriti Kumari.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10892 of 2022(2) dt.11-07-2022 2/3

¶19

case. The petitioner is languishing in custody since 21.09.2021 and bears no criminal antecedent. He further submits that the Medical Board assessed the age of victim as 18 to 19 years which is evident from Annexure-3 of the bail petition.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that she was in love with the petitioner and both read in the same school since last five years. The petitioner did nothing to induce the said victim girl rather she called the petitioner and both married in a temple at Jamui and both started residing as a husband and wife. He further submits that the statement of victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and same version has been corroborated under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

¶21

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in view the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she stated that the petitioner was being called by her and the petitioner did nothing to induce the said victim girl, material available on record, period of custody,

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10892 of 2022(2) dt.11-07-2022 3/3

¶24

charge sheet has already been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence and keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner and also taking into consideration, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Lakhisarai, in connection with Kajra P.S. Case No. 85/2021, subject to following conditions:-

¶25

(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

¶26

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶27

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶28

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶29

amitkumar/-

¶30

U T

Mayank Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayank 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhurendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sukhdeo Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Vinay Singh @ Vinay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Abhimanyu @ Mannu @ Abhimanyu Ram @ Abhimanyu Raut @ Mannu Raut Vs the State of Bihar

Queyamuddin Ansari @ Md. Kyamuddin Ansari Vs The State of Bihar