Vikram Yadav @ Vikrama Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19629 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2020 Thana- SIKRAUL District- Buxar ====================================================== Vikram Yadav @ Vikrama Yadav Son of Sheo Bihari Yadav @ Shiv Bihari Singh Resident of Village - Satuhari (Satuhadi), Police station - Sikraul, District - Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Anil Kumar Roy, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sikraul P.S. Case No. 50 of 2020 instituted for the offences under Sections 302 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from bare perusal of the F.I.R. it would manifest that the informant had alleged that her husband was regularly being threatened by the accused persons who are gotiyas over dispute relating to land. Further, that on the date of occurrence after the husband of the informant left, Birendra Yadav gave information to some person, soon thereafter Birendra and Munna followed,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19629 of 2021(2) dt.15-11-2021 2/3 subsequently she came to know that her husband has been shot dead and accordingly on basis of suspicion, the accused persons were named in the F.I.R.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is neither the agnate of the informant nor the informant had seen the occurrence being committed by the named accused persons in the F.I.R. Further, that from bare perusal of the allegation it would manifest that admittedly the occurrence had taken place on account of land dispute and since this petitioner was not related to the deceased as such there was absolutely no occasion for him to get involved in the occurrence.
Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner but on query of the Court as to whether the present petitioner was related to the deceased or not, he fairly submits that the petitioner is not related to the deceased.
Learned A.P.P. for the State also opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 10.11.2020, and co-accused Pramod Singh and Munna Yadav have been granted regular bail by this Court vide order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19629 of 2021(2) dt.15-11-2021 3/3 dated 20.07.2021 in Cr. Misc. No. 10040 of 2021, based on parity the present petitioner is also directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st, Buxar in connection with Sikraul P.S. Case No. 50 of 2020 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 437 (3) Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T