Allowed¶20

Pappu Malik @ Pappu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Apr 2024CR. MISC./5962/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail granted; IPC Ss. 324, 307, 341, 385, 506, 323/34; Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 844/2022 (West Champaran); knife blow injury; delay in lodging F.I.R.; chargesheet submitted; custody since 03.10.2023; bail-bond Rs. 10,000 with two like sureties; CJM Bettiah; Patna High Court CRL. MISC. No. 5962 of 2024; order dated 10-04-2024; Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to 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 the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran, in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 844 of 2022. ¶20

Pappu Malik @ Pappu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5962 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-844 Year-2022 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West

¶3

Champaran

¶4

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

¶5

Pappu Malik @ Pappu Kumar son of Late Mohan Mallik RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- NAURANGABAG, DOM TOLI, P.S.- BETTIAH TOWN DISTRICT- WEST CHAMPARAN

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, Advocate Ms. Rashmi Jha, Advocate ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 10-04-2024

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bettiah Town P. S. Case No. 844/2022 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 307, 341, 385, 506, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, this petitioner inflicted knife blow in the intestine of brother of the informant.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate delay of 23 days. He next submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. it is apparent that informant is not an eye witness of the occurrence and petitioner

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5962 of 2024(3) dt.10-04-2024 2/2

¶18

has been made accused on the basis of the information given by unknown persons whose identity has not been disclosed in the F.I.R. Chargesheet has already been submitted. Petitioner is in custody since 03.10.2023.

¶19

Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶20

Considering the delay in lodging the F.I.R., period of custody and the fact that chargesheet has been submitted, the bail application is allowed. Let the above named petitioner 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Bettiah Town P. S. Case No. 844 of 2022.

¶21

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶22

Navya/-

¶23

U T

Pappu Malik @ Pappu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Malik @ Pappu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhola Giri Vs the State of Bihar through Dy. S.P. -Cum -Inspector of Police, Vigilance Investigation Department

Md. Faruque @ Bholu @ Faruque Khan Vs The State of Bihar

Ramanuj Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Bipin Kumar @ Bipin Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Ram Vs the State of Bihar

Vikash Patel Vs The State of Bihar