Sunny Kumar Yadav @ Sunny Dewal @ Sonu Kumar @ Sunny Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2957 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2021 Thana- GWALPARA District- Madhepura ====================================================== SUNNY KUMAR YADAV @ SUNNY DEWAL @ SONU KUMAR @ SUNNY KUMAR Son of Sri Shailendra Yadav @ Shalen Yadav @ Salendra Yadav @ Sikendra Yadav Resident of Village - Jhanjhri, P.S.- Gwalpara, District- Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Renu Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks after complete start of the physical Court. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 03.07.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted and has antecedent of six cases. Learned counsel further submits that four cases were against unknown in which the petitioner was implicated by the police.

The informant alleges that on 08.01.2021, when he was returning to his house situated at Jhajri from Udakishunganj

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2957 of 2022(2) dt.26-05-2022 2/3 and when he reached near the bamboo orchard of Afroz, two named accused persons of his village i.e. the petitioner and Kailash Poddar intercepted him and snatched his vehicle on point of gun and fled away towards Jhajri.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and from bare perusal of the FIR, it would manifest that the informant and the petitioner were known to each other as they are residents of the same village. Learned counsel further submits that it absolutely does not stand to reason that the petitioner being known to the informant would have committed the occurrence and then would have created evidence against himself. It is further submitted that mother of the petitioner and the informant were contesting for the post of Mukhiya on account of which the present false case came to be instituted. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has antecedent of six cases.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 03.07.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted and taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2957 of 2022(2) dt.26-05-2022 3/3 released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Gwalpara P.S. Case No. 10 of 2021, subject to the condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his father Shailendra Yadav @ Shalen Yadav @ Salendra Yadav @ Sikendra Yadav.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T