Pawan Kumar Das v. The State Of Bihar
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 406, 409, 420
Judgment
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P.K.Jaipuriyar, Advocate : Mr. Anshuman Jaipuriyar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, Addl.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL ORAL ORDER 2 15-05-2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner is an accused in Jagdishpur (Goradih) P.S. Case No.16/2013 for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner and one Pawan Kumar Das are named in the F.I.R. which has been registered on the basis of written report of one Jawahar Lal Sahni, Block Education Extension Officer, Goradih, Bhgalpur who has alleged that Rs.1,72,000/- was received by Middle School, Tarchha in the head of dress amount and Rs.1,68,000/- was withdrawn and misappropriated. It is submitted that the petitioner is only the Secretary of the School Education Committee, Middle School, Tarchha and he has no financial power and has not withdrawn and misappropriated any amount. It is further submitted that the co- accused Pankaj Kumar Yadav has been granted bail vide order Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21194 of 2013 (2) dt.15-05-2013 2 dated 03.05.2013 passed in Cr. Misc. No.19348 of 2013 by a Bench of this Court. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the above-named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur in Jagdishpur (Goradih) P.S. Case No.16/2013 with the following conditions :
One of the bailors will be the close relative of the petitioner. The petitioner will not indulge in similar or in any other offence. The petitioner will be well represented in the court. In case of absence for two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned court. (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J) V.K. Pandey/-
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 406, 409, 420.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Patna High Court, on 03 May 2013. The bench was AMARESH KUMAR LAL.
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.