SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Uday Prasad vs The State Of Bihar on 15 July, 2019

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2018 Thana- GURARU District- Gaya

UDAY PRASAD S/o Late Shivnandan Prasad R/o village- Jamlapur, P.S.-
Guraru, Distt.- Gaya

… … Petitioner/s
The State of Bihar

… … Opposite Party/s

Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kr. Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajeev Nayan (APP 231)


2 15-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged
under Sections 341, Section323 Section354, Section379, Section504, Section506/Section34 IPC registered in
connection with Guraru P.S. Case No. 220 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated
and the informant is none other than the aunt of the petitioner. It is
further submitted that the accusations under Section 354 IPC are
highly improbable and doubtful. There is land dispute between the
parties and Land Dispute Resolution Suit No. 89/L/2017-18 filed at
the instance of the informant before the L.R.D.C., Tekari, Gaya has been
disposed of on 07.07.2018. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioner’s arrest or
surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of
communication of this order, let the above named petitioner be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand)
with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
ACJM V, Gaya in connection with Guraru P.S. Case No. 220 of 2018,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) SectionCr.P.C. and
also subject to the following further conditions:
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41964 of 2019(2) dt.15-07-2019

i. That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

ii. That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till
conclusion of the trial.

iii. That the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not
already concluded, and make himself available as and when so
required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.

iv. The petitioner 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, his bail bond 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 *

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