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.

Raju Kumar Gupta @ Raju Vs. State of Bihar

Raju Kumar Gupta @ Raju vs State of Bihar

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 19, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/975429

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
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Raju Kumar Gupta @ Raju

Respondent

State of Bihar

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at patna criminal miscellaneous no.32578 of 2009 ====================================================== raju kumar gupta @ raju son of late ramchandra prasad gupta, resident of mohalla-swarajpuri road, gaya, p.s.-kotwali, district-gaya. .... .... petitioner versus the state of bihar .... .... opposite party ====================================================== coram: honourable mr. justice rajendra kumar mishra oral order (per: honourable mr. justice rajendra kumar mishra”19. 01-2012 heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned a.p.p. for the state. the accused-petitioner has approached this court under section 482 of code of criminal procedure to quash the order dated 19.08.2008, passed in s. tr. no. 160 of 2007 arising out of delha p.s. case no. 51 of 2006 by the additional sessions judge, fast track court-v, gaya, whereby the representation petition under section 317 of the code of criminal procedure filed on behalf of accused- petitioner was rejected, cancelling the bail bond with order to issue non-bailable warrant. on perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the date was fixed for hearing on the petition of discharge under section 227 of the code of criminal procedure, but none patna high court cr.misc. no.32578 of 2009 (2) dt.19-01-2012 2/2 turned up on behalf of accused petitioner while the representation petition was filed on behalf of accused petitioner under section 317 of the code of criminal procedure. as such, the learned magistrate has rejected the representation petition filed under section 317 of the code of criminal procedure on behalf of accused-petitioner and cancelling the bail bond. apparent, there is no illegality in the impugned order amounting to abuse of the process of the court. accordingly, this application is dismissed. (rajendra kumar mishra, j) safik

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.32578 of 2009 ====================================================== Raju Kumar Gupta @ Raju son of late Ramchandra Prasad Gupta, resident of Mohalla-Swarajpuri Road, Gaya, P.S.-Kotwali, District-Gaya. .... .... Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA”

19. 01-2012 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. The accused-petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the order dated 19.08.2008, passed in S. Tr. No. 160 of 2007 arising out of Delha P.S. Case No. 51 of 2006 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-V, Gaya, whereby the representation petition under Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of accused- petitioner was rejected, cancelling the bail bond with order to issue non-bailable warrant. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the date was fixed for hearing on the petition of discharge under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but none Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32578 of 2009 (2) dt.19-01-2012 2/2 turned up on behalf of accused petitioner while the representation petition was filed on behalf of accused petitioner under Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As such, the learned Magistrate has rejected the representation petition filed under Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of accused-petitioner and cancelling the bail bond. Apparent, there is no illegality in the impugned order amounting to abuse of the process of the Court. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Safik

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial