Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Santosh Kamkar Vs. the State of Bihar

Santosh Kamkar vs The State of Bihar

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 24, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/974285

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Patna High Court
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Santosh Kamkar

Respondent

The State of Bihar

Excerpt

.....magistrate, 1st class, siwan to depose and as such had reached in front of bathan of petitioner wherefrom two persons escaped out of whom one was apprehended who disclosed his identity as petitioner and on search, a loaded country made pistol was recovered from his possession. contention on behalf of the petitioner happens to be that the aforesaid recovery has intentionally been shown by the patna high court cr.misc. no.3565 of 2012 (2) dt.24-01-2012 informant because petitioner as a witness had failed to depose before the court concerned. then submitted that from self statement of informant petitioner was apprehended at the spot while from column-2 of the seizure list, it is evident that there happens to be no personal recovery from the possession of the petitioner. therefore, there happens to be inconsistency with regard to manner of search and seizure followed with recovery. petitioner happens to be in custody since 26.09.2011. in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner, santosh kamkar 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, siwan in andar p.s. case no. 124 of 2011. (aditya kumar trivedi, j.) perwez./-

Full Judgment

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3565 of 2012 (2) dt.24-01-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.3565 of 2012 ====================================================== Santosh Kamkar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. I.K. Srivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI”

24. 01-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional P.P. for the State. Amagya Rai, O/C of Andar P.S. recorded his own Fardbeyan disclosing therein that he had proceeded to apprehend the petitioner against whom warrant of arrest was issued by the court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Siwan to depose and as such had reached in front of Bathan of petitioner wherefrom two persons escaped out of whom one was apprehended who disclosed his identity as petitioner and on search, a loaded country made pistol was recovered from his possession. Contention on behalf of the petitioner happens to be that the aforesaid recovery has intentionally been shown by the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3565 of 2012 (2) dt.24-01-2012 informant because petitioner as a witness had failed to depose before the court concerned. Then submitted that from self statement of informant petitioner was apprehended at the spot while from Column-2 of the seizure list, it is evident that there happens to be no personal recovery from the possession of the petitioner. Therefore, there happens to be inconsistency with regard to manner of search and seizure followed with recovery. Petitioner happens to be in custody since 26.09.2011. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner, Santosh Kamkar 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, Siwan in Andar P.S. Case No. 124 of 2011. (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.) perwez./-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial