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.

Pramod Mehta and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar

Pramod Mehta and ors. vs The State of Bihar

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 13, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/974923

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

Pramod Mehta and ors.

Respondent

The State of Bihar

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at patna criminal miscellaneous no.1167 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. pramod mehta 2. dinesh mehta 3. sandeep mehta 4. lalo mehta 5. ashok mehta.6. ratan mehta 7. lalit mehta 8. nitesh kumar 9. ganesh mehta 10. majoj mehta . . petitioners versus the state of bihar . . opposite part”13. 01-2012 heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the state. it is submitted that petitioner no.2 (dinesh mehta) has been arrested, hence his anticipatory bail application has become infructuous. accordingly, the application with regard to petitioner no.2 is disposed off. so far as other petitioners are concerned, they are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under sections 147, 149, 341, 323 and 379 of the indian penal code and section 3(i) (x) of the sc/st (prevention of atrocities) act. it is alleged against the petitioners to have made assault, snatched the watch and cash and abused the informant by calling caste name. it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that general accusation is against 40 persons in a fair and the informant has subsequently retracted from his initial version and has filed a petition to that effect before the learned court below. considering the retracted version of the informant which clouds the bona fide of the accusation, let the above named petitioner nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, on furnishing the bail bond of rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned chief judicial magistrate, saharsa in connection with sour bazar p.s. case no. 284 of 2009 subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the cr.p.c. (dinesh kumar singh, j) amrendra kumar/-

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.1167 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Pramod Mehta 2. Dinesh Mehta 3. Sandeep Mehta 4. Lalo Mehta 5. Ashok Mehta.

6. Ratan Mehta 7. Lalit Mehta 8. Nitesh Kumar 9. Ganesh Mehta 10. Majoj Mehta . . Petitioners Versus The State Of Bihar . . Opposite Part”

13. 01-2012 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the State. It is submitted that petitioner no.2 (Dinesh Mehta) has been arrested, hence his anticipatory bail application has become infructuous. Accordingly, the application with regard to petitioner no.2 is disposed off. So far as other petitioners are concerned, they are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(I) (X) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It is alleged against the petitioners to have made assault, snatched the watch and cash and abused the informant by calling caste name. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that general accusation is against 40 persons in a fair and the informant has subsequently retracted from his initial version and has filed a petition to that effect before the learned court below. Considering the retracted version of the informant which clouds the bona fide of the accusation, let the above named petitioner nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, on furnishing the bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in connection with Sour Bazar P.S. Case No. 284 of 2009 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Amrendra Kumar/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial