Allowed

Jayram Singh @ Jairam Singh v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC25 Jan 2022CR. MISC./14996/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Patna granted anticipatory bail to petitioners facing charges of kidnapping and abduction in a PS case, subject to conditions including release on personal bond and submission of monetary bond post-normalcy. The order considered the impact of the third wave of COVID-19.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond with condition to deposit Rs. 10,000 bond within eight weeks post-normalcy.

Jayram Singh @ Jairam Singh Vs the State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14996 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2020 Thana- NAUHATTA District- Saharsa

¶3

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

¶4

JAYRAM SINGH @ JAIRAM SINGH Son of Late Jakan Singh @ jaykant Singh Resident of village- Kharka Telwa, P.S.- Nauhatta, District - Saharsa.

¶5

ARUN KUMAR SINGH @ ANUJ KUMAR SINGH Son of Jayram Singh @ jairam Singh Resident of village- Kharka Telwa, P.S.- Nauhatta, District - Saharsa.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 25-01-2022

¶12

Due to the third wave of COVID-19 Pandemic, the

¶13

matter is being taken up by way of Virtual Court proceeding.

¶14

The matter has been listed under the heading ‘For Orders’ under the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State through virtual mode.

¶16

Learned Counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks after restoration of normalcy.

¶17

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Nauhatta P.S. case No.29/2020 registered under Sections 363, 366/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

Prosecution case, in short, is that the accused persons

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14996 of 2021(2) dt.25-01-2022 2/3

¶20

including the petitioners abducted the daughter of the informant.

¶21

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that

¶22

the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. The victim has been recovered. Her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded. The allegation is against the co-accused, namely, Shubham. The victim has not named the petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The case has been instituted after five days of the alleged occurrence. Delay has not been explained by the prosecution.

¶23

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioners are named in the complaint case/F.I.R.

¶24

It is necessary to indicate here that this Court while considering the prayer made in the present anticipatory bail application has taken note of the exponential rise in number of covid cases due to outbreak of third wave of Covid-19 pandemic. Further this Court can also not lose sight of the fact that the condition of jails is not conducive and suitable to the present situation which has arisen due to the sudden rise in covid cases.

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14996 of 2021(2) dt.25-01-2022 3/3

¶26

Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on their personal bond to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Saharsa in connection with Nauhatta P.S. case No.29/2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶27

Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioners shall furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶28

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶29

Narendra/-

¶30

U T

Jayram Singh @ Jairam Singh v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayram Singh @ Jairam Singh 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

Indrapati Kumar @ Indrapati Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Uchit Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Singh @ Rajendra Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Rajdeo Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Sharwan @ Sharwan Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Jay Prakash @ Mitthu Yadav Vs the State of Bihar