Vinod Yadav @ Vinod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25964 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2020 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

VINOD YADAV @ VINOD KUMAR SON OF PRAMESHWAR YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KOLUHARA, POLICE STATION- ATARI, DISTRICT- GAYA 2.

UPENDRA RAM SON OF NARESH RAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGEKOLUHARA, POLICE STATION- ATARI, DISTRICT- GAYA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 25-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defect(s) as pointed out by the office when called upon to do so by the office. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the petition against petitioner no.2, namely, Upendra Ram.

Permission is accorded.

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn with regard to petitioner no.2, namely, Upendra Ram.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25964 of 2021(2) dt.25-01-2022 2/3 So far petitioner no.1, namely, Vinod Yadav @ Vinod Kumar is concerned, he is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 341, 376, 511 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is a case of outrage the modesty of the informant, namely, Kaumudi Devi by the petitioner and other co-accused. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner no.1 has falsely been implicated in this case. From perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., it appears that she has not taken the name of this petitioner in the complicity of the alleged crime. Petitioner has got clean antecedent.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner no.1, namely, Vinod Yadav @ Vinod Kumar, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 397 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25964 of 2021(2) dt.25-01-2022 3/3 under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) brajesh kumar/- U T