SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dilip Sharma vs The State Of Bihar on 3 July, 2019


Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2017 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria

1. DILIP SHARMA, aged about 46 years, male, Son of Prithwi Chandra
Sharma Resident of Village- Latora, P.S.- Araria, District- Araria.
2. Sunil Sharma @ Sunil Kr. Sharma, aged 42 years, male, S/o- Prithwi
Chandra Sharma Resident of Village- Latora, P.S.- Araria, District- Araria.
3. Subodh Sharma, Aged 38 years, male, S/o – Prithwi Chandra Sharma
Resident of Village- Latora, P.S.- Araria, District- Araria.
4. Prithwi Chandra Sharma, Age 65 years, male, S/o Late Nandkeshwar
Sharma Resident of Village- Latora, P.S.- Araria, District- Araria.

… … Petitioners
The State of Bihar

… … Opposite Party

Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party: APP


2 03-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the
offences alleged under Sections 341, Section323, Section379, Section354B, Section504, Section506/Section34
of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Araria P.S.
Case No. 220 of 2017.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely
implicated and in any event the ingredients of the offence under
Section 354 IPC are not made out whatsoever. The accusation of
assault with fatta, fists and kicks is on co-accused Anil Sharma.
The accusation of snatching gold ornament and cash are general
and omnibus and mere embellishment. The petitioners claim
clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioners’
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40476 of 2019(2) dt.03-07-2019

arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from
the date of communication of this order, let the above named
petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Araria in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 220 of 2017,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2)
SectionCr.P.C., and also subject to the following further conditions –

(i) That one of the bailors of each of the petitioners
shall be their close relatives other than the petitioners herein.

(ii) That the petitioners shall not indulge in any
similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) That the petitioners shall cooperate with the
investigation, if not already concluded, and make themselves
available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State
shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iv) That the petitioners shall remain physically
present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the
event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the
learned Court concerned.

(Vikash Jain, J)


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation