Veeram Yadav @ Birram Yadav @ Birram Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5489 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2020 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== VEERAM YADAV @ BIRRAM YADAV @ BIRRAM SINGH SON OF SITA RAM YADAV R/O VILLAGE- IBRAHIMPUR, P.S.- ARA TOWN, DISTRICT- BHOJPUR ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-06-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 30.06.2022 in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No.203/2020, F.I.R. dated 18.05.2020, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 384, 506, 504, 307/34 of the IPC & Section 27 of the Arms Act.
According to prosecution case, the petitioner along with co-accused persons demanded ransom of Rs. Five lacs from the informant and when the informant denied to pay the extortion money, the petitioner and co-accused, namely, Jataha Yadav @ Jata Yadav have fired upon the informant and his brother to kill them but any how the informant and his brother
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5489 of 2023(3) dt.21-06-2023 2/3 fled away and saved their life.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated. He further submits that as per F.I.R., the allegation against the petitioner is that he fired upon the informant and his brother but the bullet did not hit anyone. He further submits that in fact, no such occurrence as alleged in the F.I.R. has taken place and the present case has been instituted only to harass the petitioner. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 04.11.2022 whereas, the coaccused, Jataha Yadav @ Jata Yadav, who is having same allegation as attributed to the petitioner, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 72795 of 2022.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5489 of 2023(3) dt.21-06-2023 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M, Bhojpur, Ara in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No.203/2020, subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
3. 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) brajesh/- U T