Allowed

Amit Kumar @ Arvind Jamadar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC27 Apr 2022CR. MISC./29382/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Bench granted anticipatory bail to petitioner in a case under Essential Commodities Act on conditions of court fee deposit and removal of defects within four weeks requiring regular bail upon arrest.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to petitioner on furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, if arrested or surrenders within four weeks.

Amit Kumar @ Arvind Jamadar Vs the State of Bihar — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29382 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2020 Thana- HARNAUT District- Nalanda

¶3

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

¶4

Amit Kumar @ Arvind Jamadar Son of Ramashray Prasad @ Ramashray Jamadar Resident of Village- Mirdaha Chak, P.S.- Harnaut, District- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

4 27-04-2022

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.A.G ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶11

learned APP for the State.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected

¶13

to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for

¶14

depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by the office when called upon to do so by the office.

¶15

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

¶16

It is alleged that 18 quintals rice of Public Distribution System was being transported in Tata Magic

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29382 of 2021(4) dt.27-04-2022 2/3

¶18

Van of the petitioner for selling it in the black-market.

¶19

It is submitted by learned counsel for the

¶20

petitioner that petitioner is owner of the alleged seized vehicle. The driver of the vehicle who was apprehended from the spot has been granted bail by the learned Court below. It is further submitted that F.I.R was registered on 17.04.2020 whereas the seized vehicle of the petitioner was registered on 21.12.2020. Hence, the vehicle in question might be used by the driver without any knowledge to the petitioner. The petitioner is not a PDS dealer and he has no concern with the seized rice. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

¶21

In the facts and circumstance of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousands) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29382 of 2021(4) dt.27-04-2022 3/3

¶23

satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Harnaut P.S. Case No.

¶24

156 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶25

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

¶26

Shageer/-

¶27

U T

Amit Kumar @ Arvind Jamadar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar @ Arvind Jamadar 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

Raj Kumar Agarwal Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Munna Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

MD Aman Alam @ MD Aman Vs The State of Bihar

Rajat Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Rahul Paswan @ Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar