Niraj Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42721 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -337 Year- 2017 Thana -BETTIAH CITY DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Niraj Yadav Son of Bhikhari Yadav, R/o Village- Parvatiya Tola, P.S.- Bettiah, Muffasil, District- West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 08-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 16.05.2017 in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 337 of 2017 for offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, as lodged by the Hawaldar, is that while trial prisoner Babloo Dubey was being produced in the court some miscreants fired and killed him. The miscreants were chased but they managed to escape.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent, bears no criminal history and he has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42721 of 2017 (2) dt.08-11-2017 2/3 been falsely implicated just because he is nephew of co-accused Vijay Yadav. He submits that in the confessional statement of Vijay Yadav and Suraj Mahto it is not alleged that any overt act has been committed by the petitioner rather Vijay Yadav has been asked to eliminate Babloo Dubey under trial prisoner by a veteran criminal while he was in custody and the petitioner happens to be nephew of Vijay Yadav. He submits that firing has been made by Suman Sourabh accused was not the petitioner. He submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no allegation of tampering of the prosecution witnesses by the petitioner.

However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran Bettiah, in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 337 of 2017, subject to the conditions that:

(1) Both bailors would be close relative of the petitioner having sufficient immovable property, who will file an affidavit

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42721 of 2017 (2) dt.08-11-2017 3/3 stating their relationship with the petitioner.

(2) Petitioner will appear before the learned court below during trial as and when required and failure to appear on two consecutive dates without assigning any reason will entail cancellation of his bail bonds.

(Nilu Agrawal, J) Devendra/- U T