Babulal Kisku v. The State Of Bihar
Case at a glance
- Bench
- DINESH KUMAR SINGH
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 342, 379, 384, 504
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Judgment
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02/ 22-04-2013 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners, the State and the informant. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 504, 379 and 384/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The accusation is of harvesting the crop of the informant side when protest was made the accused persons assaulted the husband of the informant. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.9964 of 2013 (2) dt.22-04-2013 petitioners that for the occurrence of 19.03.2012 the FIR was registered on 21.03.2012 when serious litigation is going on between the parties and this fact has not been controverted by learned counsel for the informant. However, it is submitted by learned counsel for the informant that the petitioners were also made accused in other criminal case when it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the said case was lodged by the informant side and that also relates to the theft of crop. Considering the nature of accusation and the litigating relationship between the parties, let the above named petitioners be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Araria in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 109 of 2012, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. DKS/ (Dinesh Kumar Singh, 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.