Mantu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.35061 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -28 Year- 2017 Thana -NAUTAN District- SIWAN ======================================================

1. Mantu Yadav s/o Krishna Yadav@ Krishnanand Choudhary resident of Village - Basdewa, P.S. - Nautan, District - Siwan. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Dubey, For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri S. Ehteshamuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 23-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 17.04.2017 in connection with Nautan P.S. Case No. 28 of 2017 for offences punishable under Sections 307, 379 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, is that while she and her daughter-in-law were sleeping in the house, she heard a sound of breaking of lock and found the petitioner breaking the lock of the box. Thereafter, petitioner assaulted the informant by means of knife on her abdomen which hit on her thigh and he fled away with VIP box containing

ornaments and cash of Rs. 7,000/- It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case due to personal enmity. He submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no allegation of tampering of prosecution witnesses by the petitioner and simple injury has been found on the informant which is not on the vital part of the body.

However, learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer of bail stating therein that the petitioner has been identified by the victim-informant and the informant was intended to be hit on the abdomen but it hit her thigh. He also submits that petitioner does not have clean antecedent and one more case is pending against him.

Learned APP also opposes the prayer of bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail after completion of six months custody on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like

amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate XII, Siwan in connection with Nautan P.S. Case No. 28 of 2017, subject to the condition that one of the bailors would be a close relative of the petitioner.

(Nilu Agrawal, J) sushma/- U T