Disposed

Pappu @ Pappu Yadav @ Pawan Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Dec 2022CR. MISC./28376/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Oral order on regular bail application under Section 386 IPC. Court rejected bail, directed trial within 12 months, and summoned prosecution witnesses. Bail disposed of subject to renewal after 12 months if no progress is made.

What did the court decide?

Bail application disposed; trial directed to conclude within 12 months; prosecution witnesses to be produced on fixed date; liberty to renew bail after 12 months if no progress.

Pappu @ Pappu Yadav @ Pawan Yadav Vs the State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28376 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-362 Year-2015 Thana- FORBESGANJ District- Araria

¶3

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

¶4

Pappu @ Pappu Yadav @ Pawan Yadav, S/o Samat Lal Yadav Resident of Village - Achra, P.S. - Fulkaha, District - Araria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, A.P.P.

¶12

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

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶14

5 21-12-2022

¶15

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

¶16

The petitioner, who is in custody since 17.08.2020 seeks regular bail in connection with Forbesganj (Simraha) P.S. Case No. 362 of 2015, for the offence punishable under Section 386 of Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria.

¶17

The prosecution case, in brief, is that informant lodged the present case against unknown caller of mobile no. 7870758825 and subsequent to same by other two mobiles referred in the F.I.R. for life threatening for identifying the petitioner in T.I.P.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the alleged mobile number does not belongs to the petitioner. He further

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28376 of 2022(5) dt.21-12-2022 2/2

¶20

submits that the petitioner was in custody at the time of lodging of F.I.R. The petitioner is in custody since 17.08.2020.

¶21

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶22

Considering the nature of allegation made in the F.I.R. and the number of cases pending against the petitioner, this Court had rejected the bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner vide order dated 31.01.2022 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 43041 of 2021 and liberty was granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail.

¶23

The trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial expeditiously and conclude the same within a period of 12 months from the date of this order. The Superintendent of Police, Araria is directed to produce all the prosecution witnesses on the date fixed by the learned court below.

¶24

If no substantial progress takes place in the trial, the petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after the aforesaid period of 12 months.

¶25

Accordingly, the bail application stands disposed of.

¶26

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶27

manish/-

¶28

U T

Pappu @ Pappu Yadav @ Pawan Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu @ Pappu Yadav @ Pawan 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

Akash Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Punay Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Jagdish Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Manish Sahani @ Manik Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Home, Govt. of BIhar, Patna

Akash Kumar Vs the State of Bihar