Dismissed

Rahul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Aug 2024CR. MISC./14983/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an oral order arising from a PS case in Bhagalpur, the High Court of Judicature at Patna granted permission to the petitioner to withdraw his anticipatory bail application. Consequently, the application was dismissed as withdrawn. The court also dispensed with personal appearances of police officials.

What did the court decide?

Permission accorded to withdraw the anticipatory bail application; application dismissed as withdrawn.

Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14983 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2022 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Bhagalpur

¶3

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

¶4

Rahul Kumar SON OF WAKIL SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGEBALKUNDA, PS- MANSI, DISTT- KHAGARIA

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Priyanka Bharti Daughter Of Sri Umesh Singh Resident Of VillageBishupuria, Ps- Khariak, Distt- Bhagalpur

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Avinava Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Meena Singh ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶12

6 23-08-2024

¶13

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P.

¶14

for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

¶15

2. The learned APP, at the outset, submits that the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur was directed to remain physically present by order dated by order dated 21-8-2024. It is further submitted that the case pertained to Naugachia, as such, the S.S.P, Bhagalpur informed the S.P. Naugachia to remain present in the court today in compliance of the order dated 21-8-2024. It is further submitted that the Superintendent of Police, Naugachia is present in the court.

¶16

3. The Superintendent of Police, Naugachia submits that earlier endeavours were made to get the notice under Section 41(A)

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14983 of 2024(6) dt.23-08-2024 2/2

¶18

of the Cr.P.C served on the petitioner, but then the same could not be served as petitioner was not present in his house, hence notice under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P..C was sent by speed-post, but then fairly submits that he does not have the tracking report, as such, he is not aware whether notice under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C has been received by the petitioner or his family members or not, but then submits that notice under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C shall be issued to the petitioner in accordance with law by day after tomorrow.

¶19

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner based on the submission made by the Superintendent of Police Naugachia, seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application.

¶20

5. Permission is accorded.

¶21

6. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶22

7. The personal appearance of the Superintendent of Police, Naugachia and the Investigating Officer of the case is dispensed with.

¶23

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶24

SUMIT/-

¶25

U T

Rahul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar 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

Nawal Kishore Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ravindra Kumar @ Ravindra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjit Kumar Yadav @ Ranjit Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Raja Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramdeo Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar

Himanshu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar