Partly allowed

Anil Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC30 Aug 2022CR. MISC./8214/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This oral order dealt with a petition for anticipatory bail. The court granted bail to Petitioner No. 1, Anil Prasad, on specific terms, but rejected the prayer for Petitioner No. 2, Appu Kumar, due to specific allegations of assault causing grievous injury.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 1 allowed; prayer for Petitioner No. 2 rejected.

Anil Prasad Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8214 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2020 Thana- BARHARIA District- Siwan

¶3

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

¶4

ANIL PRASAD Son of Late Sitaram Prasad Resident of Village - Kail Tola, Musehari, P.S.- Barharia, Distt.- Siwan.

¶5

Appu Kumar Son of Late Gorakh Prasad Resident of Village - Kail Tola, Musehari, P.S.- Barharia, Distt.- Siwan.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anita Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 30-08-2022

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Barhariya P.S. Case No. 143 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341,323, 324, 337, 307, 427, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

There is specific allegation against petitioner No. 2, Appu Kumar, that he assaulted the informant on his head with iron rod. The injuries on the person of informant is grievous in nature.

¶17

So far as petitioner No. 1 is concerned, there is general and omnibus allegation against him.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8214 of 2022(2) dt.30-08-2022 2/2

¶19

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, petitioner No. 2 Appu Kumar, does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected .

¶20

Let the petitioner No. 1, Anil Prasad, in the event of his arrest or surrender within four weeks before the learned court below, 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 learned Court of ACM 1^st , District Siwan in connection with Barhariya P.S. Case No. 143 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶21

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioners within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

¶22

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶23

SONALI/-

¶24

U T

Anil Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Prasad 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

Ashok Chaudhari Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar

Jitendra Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar

Kanhaiya Rai @ Raghbendra Rai Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Nanki Vs The State of Bihar