Sarvesh Singh @ Dimpu Singh v. The State Of Bihar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
detention, I direct that the above named petitioner be released on bail on
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 307, 328, 379, 411
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ss. 21, 22
Judgment
Operative part
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 2 03-10-2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sarvesh Singh @ Dimpu Singh, son of Lalan Singh, who is in custody since 22.07.2013 in connection with Rail Gaya P.S. Case No.84 of 2013 for the offence punishable under Sections 328, 307, 379, 411 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 21 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (N.D.P.S.). Heard the learned A.P.P. also. The allegation is that the petitioner administered Ativan tablets of 2 mg to the informant as a result the informant became senseless. 9 Ativan tablets have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and 2 strips of 10 each and one strips of 9, 11 tablets have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner is of 25 years old and is in custody since 22.07.2013. Considering the nature of allegation and the period of detention, I direct that the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Gaya in connection with Rail Gaya P.S. Case No.84 of 2013. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: detention, I direct that the above named petitioner be released on bail on
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 307, 328, 379, 411; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — ss. 21, 22.
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.