SANTOSH YADAV @ CHINTU YADAV v. THE STATE OF BIHAR
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SANJEEV PRAKASH
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 363, 366(A)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Mr.Vibhakar Kumar Mr.A.G. ORAL ORDER 2 04-01-2022 Heard both the parties through video conferencing. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Rajourn P.S. Case No.116/2018 instituted for the offences under Sections 363 and 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Taking into consideration the nature of allegation and the statement of victim , who is said to have been performed marriage with the petitioner and is living with him, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petitioner above named, in the event of arrest shall be released on bail on sum of Rs. 20,000/-(rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Banka in connection with Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18515 of 2021(2) dt.04-01-2022 Rajourn P.s. Case No.116/2018 subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. amit/- U T (Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, 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.