← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./13893/2025bail granted

Dharmveer Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-29Mr. Justice Sourendra Pandey5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12567 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-275 Year-2024 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Ajeet Yadav @ Ajeet Kumar Yadav @ Ajit Kumar Yadav Son of Vishnudeo Yadav @ Vishundev Prasad Yadav @ Bishundev Yadav village- Bangaliya, Rohiar, PS- Mansi District- Khagaria Bihar 851214 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 13893 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-275 Year-2024 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Dharmveer Yadav Son of Late Damodar Yadav Resident of VillageBangaliya, P.S. Mansi, District- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 12567 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Shankar Roy, Advocate Mr.Bhim Kr. Yadav, Advocate Mr.Mahendra Thakur, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Bharat Lal, APP Mr.Choube Jawahar, APP For the Informant :

Mr.Brajesh Sahay, Advocate Ms.Harshita, Advocate Ms.Rishika, Advocate (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 13893 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Shankar Roy, Advocate Mr.Bhim Kr. Yadav, Advocate Mr.Mahendra Thakur, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Bharat Lal, APP Mr.Choube Jawahar, APP

2/5 For the Informant :

Mr.Brajesh Sahay, Advocate Ms.Harshita, Advocate Ms.Rishika, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 29-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant Mr.Brajesh Sahay and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Mansi P.S. Case No. 275 of 2024, registered for the offences under Section109, 103(1), 352, 351, 3(5) of B.N.S., Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case the informant has alleged that on 17.11.2024, while he was taking a walk the accused persons came there all variously armed and it is alleged that Arjun Yadav fired upon Ankit kumar and then the said Arjun Yadav also fired upon the informant Ashok Poddar.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that they have not been named accused in the present case and their names have surfaced during the course of investigation and in the confessional statement of co-accused and it has been alleged that the petitioners have facilitated in the escape of the main accused Arjun Yadav. It has also been stated that there is

3/5 nothing to connect the petitioners with the present incident barring the allegations that Rs.30,000/- was paid by the petitioner Ajit Yadav to the main assailant Arjun Yadav. It is next submitted that even during the course of investigation no material has come forward to show the complicity of the petitioners in the present case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner Ajit Yadav has two antecedent and is in custody since 25.11.2024, while petitioner Dharamveer Yadav has clean antecedent and is in custody since 25.11.2024. It has also been submitted that similarly situated co-accused persons namely Krishna Nandan Kumar has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Hon. Court vide order dated 26.05.2025, passed in Cr.Misc.No.9271 of 2025.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant Mr.Brajesh Sahay have jointly opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and stated that the petitioners have been accused of harbouring the main assailant and assisted him to escape. Learned counsel for the informant has further pointed out that co-accused, the main assailant Arjun Yadav had committed another murder once he was out of jail and hence the informant and his family members are under constant threat and fear because of these

4/5 petitioners.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that the petitioners are in custody since 25.11.2024 and similarly siutated co-accused has been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench of this Hon'ble Court, let the petitioners above-named be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each of them with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Mansi P.S. Case No. 275 of 2024 subject to the conditions :- a. One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative.

b. The petitioners shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.

c. In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to the cancelled by the court concerned.

d. The Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is

5/5 found that the petitioners have concealed their 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 afore-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification. (Sourendra Pandey, J) Saurav/- U T