Raj Kumar Yadav @ Chintu Yadav @ Raj Kamal Ranjan @ Chantu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6541 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-200 Year-2023 Thana- JALALGARH District- Purnia ====================================================== Raj Kumar Yadav @ Chintu Yadav @ Raj Kamal Ranjan @ Chantu Yadav S/O SATISH YADAV VILLAGE- RAGHUNATHPUR, PS. BHARGAMA, DIST. ARARIA.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vivekanand Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Zainul Abedin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 09-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with jalalgarh P.S. Case No. 200 of 2023 registered on 19.10.2023 lodged under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, F.I.R. has been lodged against 7 named accused persons including the petitioner against whom there is an allegation of torturing the informant, whose marriage has been solemnized with one of the accused namely Lalan Yadav, along with the family members which resulted into the death of the informant.

4. Counsel further submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further submits that petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6541 of 2024(3) dt.09-04-2024 2/3 is in custody since 20.10.2023 having clean antecedents. He further submits that petitioner is not the family member rather he is Bhanja of the husband of the deceased. Charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. He also submits that husband of the deceased is already in custody.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the material has come against the present petitioner. In the said material, it seems that there is involvement of the present petitioner in the commission of the crime.

7. Upon specific query made by this Court that whether charge has been framed or not, counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not aware of this fact that charge has been framed or not.

7. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, let the petitioner, above named, be granted bail one month after framing of charge and on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Purnea in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6541 of 2024(3) dt.09-04-2024 3/3 connection with jalalgarh P.S. Case No. 200 of 2023 subject to the following conditions as well as the conditions laid down under Section 437 (3) of the Cr.P.C.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Sunnykr/- U