Allowed

Vikash Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC19 Sept 2022CR. MISC./18927/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order granting bail to petitioner Vikash Kumar in a case involving offences under Section 394 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act. Petitioner released on bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties subject to conditions regarding attendance, evidence tampering, and concealment of antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to specific conditions.

Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18927 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2020 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali

¶3

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

¶4

Vikash Kumar Son of Shatrudhan Singh Resident of Village - Sherpur, P.S. - Jandaha, District - Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 19-09-2022

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶13

Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

¶14

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶15

According to prosecution case, the informant was returning to his house when he was intercepted by three accused persons. One of the accused fired upon the informant caused him injury and thereafter they fled away.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18927 of 2022(3) dt.19-09-2022 2/3

¶18

in the F.I.R. and the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused namely, Bittu Kumar. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and till date no T.I.P. has been conducted by the prosecution. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 16.09.2020..

¶19

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner carries nine criminal antecedents other than the present one.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 26 of 2020, subject to the following conditions:-

¶21

Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and

¶22

shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18927 of 2022(3) dt.19-09-2022 3/3

¶24

as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶25

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.

¶26

And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶27

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶28

Mdrashid/ Vanisha

¶29

U T

Vikash Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikash 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

Babhana Kumar @ Ankit Kumar @ Bhagwan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

MD Jainul Vs The State of Bihar

Devi Nand Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Bindu Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Usman @ Usman Miya Vs The State of Bihar

Sudhir Singh Vs The State of Bihar