Sanjeev Kumar @ Kaila Yadav @ Deepak Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2195 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2024 Thana- Raghuvanshnagar District- Purnia ====================================================== Sanjeev Kumar @ Kaila Yadav @ Deepak Yadav S/O Chitbodh Yadav Resident of Village-Koriya Rahi, Ward No-12, P.S- Raghwansh Nagar, District- Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Raghuwansnagar P.S. Case No. 57 of 2024 registered for the offences under Sections 126(2), 329(3), 64 and 351(2) of the BNS.

3. The allegation upon the petitioner is that he called the victim informant outside her house after making a call and despite the presence of the husband of the informant outside, he forcefully committed rape upon her.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2195 of 2025(5) dt.12-05-2025 2/3 the present case with a false and concocted story. The learned counsel has stated that the petitioner is the relative of the informant and from the very perusal of the FIR it appears to be a concocted story as no effort of raising alarm was made by the informant. The learned counsel has pointed out to the case diary where the police had taken note of the fact that there was no call made on the mobile phone of the informant as alleged in the FIR which falsifies the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody since 13.11.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the fact that the basis of the allegation of making a call to the informant was falsified during the course of investigation and also the period of custody, let the above named petitioner, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate I, Purnea in connection with Raghuwansnagar P.S. Case No. 57 of 2024 with further condition:-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2195 of 2025(5) dt.12-05-2025 3/3 a. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.

b. The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.

c. In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail and if the prosecution is found involvement of the petitioner in similar nature of offence, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be canceled by the Court concerned.

d. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification (Sourendra Pandey, J) Prakash/- U