VIKASH MALAKAR @ VIKASH KUMAR v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120(B), 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 332, 333, 341, 342, 353, 504, 506
- Representation of the People Act, 1951 s. 135(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Judgment
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2021 Thana- MANPUR District- Nalanda ====================================================== BHUNA MAHTO @ ANANT KUMAR Son of Upendra Mahto Resident of Village - Sarbahadi, Police Station - Manpur, District - Nalanda
Niku Kumar @ Nitesh Kumar Son of Arun Prasad Resident of Village - Sarbahdi, Police Station - Manpur, District - Nalanda The State of Bihar Versus ... ... Petitioner/s ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1052 of 2023) For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1456 of 2023) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vindhyachal Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr.Vipin Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP Mr. Vindhyachal Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr.Vipin Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 2 07-02-2023 As both these bail applications have been cropped up from the same police station case number, hence, with consent Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1052 of 2023(2) dt.07-02-2023 of parties, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common order.
Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 504, 506, 332, 333, 353, 307 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code band U/s 135(a) of the R.P. Act pending in the learned court below. Allegation against the petitioners is that they along with other persons disobeyed the curfew with the intention to disturb the Panchayat Election, 2021, attacked the officials and police forces by pelting bricks stones and created obstacle in discharging government duty. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners and petitioners are only the member of the mob. He submits that there is no specific overt act against the petitioners.
He further submits that similarly situated other co-accused person has already been granted bail by a bench of this Court vide order dated 12.10.2022 passed in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1052 of 2023(2) dt.07-02-2023 Cr. Misc. No. 27151/2022. He further submits that petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail application. Learned APP for the State opposes for prayer for bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, named above, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court below, where the case is pending/Successor court, in connection with Manpur P.S. Case No.139/2021, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ajay/- U T
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.