Bablu Yadav @ Bimalesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2818 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2024 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ====================================================== Bablu Yadav @ Bimalesh Yadav Son of Late Shivdhari Yadav village - Khajuri, Ward no. 09, Ps- Bhargama, Dist- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr.Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 246 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 103(1), 331(4), 305, 76, 61(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the 10 accused persons including the petitioner and 25 to 30 unknown being armed with weapon surrounded the house of the informant. It is alleged that Sajay Yadav fired with a double barrel gun at the mother of the informant which hit in the right hand. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2818 of 2025(2) dt.28-02-2025 2/3 alleged that Ajay Yadav and Vijay Yadav fired at Parmanand Yadav who died at the spot. The main thrust of allegation is agaisnt Ajay Yadav and Vijay Yadav. It is further alleged that rest of the accused persons entered into the house of the informant and took away valuables.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The nature of allegation is general and omnibus. There is no allegation of any specific overt act against the petitioner. A statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that similar situated co-accused has since been extended the privilege of bail vide order dated 24.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 79217 of 2024. He is languishing in judicial custody since 19.10.2024.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2818 of 2025(2) dt.28-02-2025 3/3 Magistrate, Araria in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 246 of 2024.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Jagdish/- U T