Allowed

Bhim Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC27 Jul 2022CR. MISC./25491/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a rape and kidnapping case involving a minor, the High Court granted bail to the petitioner who was in custody since September 2020. Directions were issued to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, considering bail already granted to co-accused.

What did the court decide?

Order directing petitioner to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the like amount.

Bhim Yadav Vs the State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25491 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2020 Thana- GAUNAHA District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

BHIM YADAV Son of Late Chandrika Yadav Resident of Village - Parasa, P.S.- Gaunaha, Distt.- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Shrivastava, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 27-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail in a

¶13

case registered under sections 363 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

As per the allegations in the F.I.R., seven named accused persons are said to have kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant.

¶15

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. His case stands on a similar footing to that of other co-accused who have been enlarged on bail vide order dated 18.5.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. no.42414 of 2021 and order dated 23.5.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. no.52093 of 2021. The petitioner is in custody since 29.9.2020 and has no criminal antecedent.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25491 of 2022(3) dt.27-07-2022 2/2

¶17

Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶18

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

¶19

taking into consideration grant of bail to the four co-accused by the two orders referred to herein above together with the petitioner having remained in custody since 29.9.2020, the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection with Gaunaha P.S. Case no.41 of 2020 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge VII-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, West Champaran, Bettiah.

¶20

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶21

Saurabh/-

¶22

U T

Bhim Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhim 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

Vishwanath Sharma @ Vishunath Lohar @ Vishwanath Lohar Vs Ajay Yadav

Budhan Bhagat Vs Parsan Prasad Singh

The State Of Bihar Through Collector, Bhojpur and Ors. Vs Smt. Moti Rani Devi

Kamlesh Ojha Vs the State of Bihar

Tarannum Khatoon Vs The State of Bihar

Satya Devi Vs The State of Bihar