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.

Fakru @ Nesar Vs. the State of Bihar

Fakru @ Nesar vs The State of Bihar

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 24, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/974376

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
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Fakru @ Nesar

Respondent

The State of Bihar

Excerpt

patna high court cr.misc. no.3580 of 2012 (2) dt.24-01-2012 in the high court of judicature at patna criminal miscellaneous no.3580 of 2012 ====================================================== fakru @ nesar .... .... petitioner/s versus the state of bihar .... .... opposite party/s ====================================================== 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 as well as learned a.p.p. on a petition filed by ruby khatoon before the superior police official, alleging inter alia that her daughter aged about seven month has been taken away by the petitioner (fakru, son of munna minya), over which an inquiry was entrusted to the informant of this case, namely, b.n. rai. during conduction of aforesaid inquiry found that fakru and ruby khatoon happens to be spouse. ruby khatoon happens to be a prosecute. they had purchased the girl from the clinic of dr. birendra kumar for rs.500/- and accordingly they have been booked. contention on behalf of the petitioner is that it is wrong to say that they had purchased the girl from dr. birendra kumar rather he along with ruby khatoon happens to be natural guardian. taking into account the aforesaid theme, ruby khatoon was granted bail vide cr. misc. no.38455 of 2011. dr. birendra kumar who was also made patna high court cr.misc. no.3580 of 2012 (2) dt.24-01-2012 an accused was granted bail vide cr. misc. no.33056 of 2011. in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner, fakru @ nesar is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned chief judicial magistrate, muzaffarpur in connection with mithanpura p.s. case no.210 of 2011, g.r. no.2947/2011. (aditya kumar trivedi, j.) pn

Full Judgment

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3580 of 2012 (2) dt.24-01-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.3580 of 2012 ====================================================== Fakru @ Nesar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== 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 as well as learned A.P.P. On a petition filed by Ruby Khatoon before the superior police official, alleging inter alia that her daughter aged about seven month has been taken away by the petitioner (Fakru, son of Munna Minya), over which an inquiry was entrusted to the informant of this case, namely, B.N. Rai. During conduction of aforesaid inquiry found that Fakru and ruby Khatoon happens to be spouse. Ruby Khatoon happens to be a prosecute. They had purchased the girl from the clinic of Dr. Birendra Kumar for Rs.500/- and accordingly they have been booked. Contention on behalf of the petitioner is that it is wrong to say that they had purchased the girl from Dr. Birendra Kumar rather he along with Ruby Khatoon happens to be natural guardian. Taking into account the aforesaid theme, Ruby Khatoon was granted bail vide Cr. Misc. No.38455 of 2011. Dr. Birendra Kumar who was also made Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3580 of 2012 (2) dt.24-01-2012 an accused was granted bail vide Cr. Misc. No.33056 of 2011. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner, Fakru @ Nesar is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection with Mithanpura P.S. Case No.210 of 2011, G.R. No.2947/2011. (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.) PN

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial