Sunil Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 394, 411
Judgment
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 2 07-10-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner, namely, Sunil Yadav is an accused in a case instituted for the offence under sections 394 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code. According the prosecution case, unknown miscreants snatched the mobile and cash of Rs.2000/- from the informant’s pocket and fled away. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the F.I.R. is against unknown and in the confessional statement co- accused Chandan Yadav has named the present petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 15.05.2013. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five thousand) with Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38064 of 2013 (2) dt.07-10-2013 two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of Sri Manoj Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Madhepura in connection with Madhepura (Bharrahi O.P.) P.S. Case No. 283/2013. Amin/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.