Ranjeet Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13997 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2024 Thana- SARMERA District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.
Ranjeet Yadav Son of Madan Yadav R/vill - Sarmera, P.S - Nalanda, Distt.- Nalanda (Bihar) 2.
Bhasho Yadav @ Arun Yadav Son of Madan Yadav R/vill - Sarmera, P.S - Nalanda, Distt.- Nalanda (Bihar) 3.
Suresh Yadav Son of Chote Yadav R/vill - Sarmera, P.S - Nalanda, Distt.- Nalanda (Bihar) .. ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-07-2025 Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sarmera P.S. Case No. 213 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 27.09.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 190, 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 76, 303(2), 352, 351(1), 325 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, all the accused persons including these petitioners have assaulted the daughter and sons of the informant due to which they have received injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13997 of 2025(4) dt.08-07-2025 2/3 allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioners have not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. Although petitioners are named in the F.I.R and from perusal of the F.I.R it appears that the allegation is against petitioner no. 1 is that he assaulted the daughter of the informant, namely, Anita Devi and the allegation against the petitioner no. 2 is that he assaulted to the second son of the informant and petitioner no. 3 assaulted the son of the informant due to which they have received injuries but the injury report of the injured persons suggest that all the injuries are simple in nature.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioners have clean antecedent and all the injuries are simple in nature, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Nalanda in connection with Sarmera P.S. Case No. 213 of 2024, subject to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13997 of 2025(4) dt.08-07-2025 3/3 the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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) Vanisha/- U T