On an application to cancel anticipatory bail granted to opposite party Nos. 2 to 6, the Court rejected the petitioner's claim of criminal antecedents based on the opposite parties' acquittal in a prior case. The application was dismissed.
Cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 was rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29873 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2018 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
HRIDYANAND TIWARY Son of Late Sudama Tiwary Resident of VillageLaukaha, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
... ... Opposite Parties
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Binod Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
This application has been filed for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to O.P. Nos. 2 to 6.
It has been stated on behalf of the petitioner that the Opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 have got one criminal antecedent i.e. Paharpur P.S. Case No. 131 of 2013.
A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Opposite party Nos. 2 to 6.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29873 of 2019(3) dt.15-02-2023 2/2
In paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit, it has been stated that the Opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 have already been acquitted in the above-referred case. Hence there is no criminal antecedent of Opposite party Nos. 2 to 6. Except for this, there is no other ground has been taken by the petitioner for cancellation of bail granted to opposite party Nos. 2 to 6.
Therefore, I find no reason to interfere in the order granting anticipatory bail to the Opposite party Nos. 2 to 6.
Accordingly, the present application stands dismissed.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
A.K.V.//-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the anticipatory bail granted to opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 should be cancelled.
Whether being acquitted in a prior case constitutes a criminal antecedent sufficient for cancellation of bail.
Hridyanand Tiwary
The State of Bihar and Others
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
