SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Pat) 381

ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI
Sadho Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants : Mr. Kumar Goutam.
For the Respondent: Mr. Binay Krishna.

ORDER

Instant appeal has been preferred at the instance of appellants, Sadho Yadav, Rajo Yadav, Shiv Kumar Yadav @ Gonar Yadav after having been refused by the Addl. Sessions Judge, 1st, Supaul to release them on an anticipatory bail vide order dated 04.01.2017 passed in ABA No.940 of 2016 under Section 14A(2) of the SC,ST (POA) Act.

2. During course of hearing, the learned counsel for the appellants put stress over the order dated 01.09.2016 passed by Sessions Judge, Supaul in ABA No.723 of 2016 whereby and whereunder prayer for anticipatory bail of appellants Rajo Yadav, Sadho Yadav (ABA No.723 of 2016), Shiv Kumar Yadav Gonar Yadav (ABA No.741 of 2016) were rejected while Badri Yadav, Pulkit Yadav and Punit Yadav (ABA No.723 of 2016), Raj Kumar Yadav @ Negar Yadav, Leela Yadav, Kishun Yadav, Gango Yadav and Butan Yadav (ABA No.741 of 2016) were allowed relating to Marouna P.S. Case No.22/2016, and so submitted that appellants be also allowed to avail privilege of anticipatory bail.

3. After hearing as well as going through the allegation on its face they all were noticed to explain why not their bail bonds be cancelled and in pursuance thereof, they appeared, filed their show cause

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top