Santu Yadav @ Sentu Yadav @ Sintu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19048 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-251 Year-2024 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Santu Yadav @ Sentu Yadav @ Sintu Yadav S/o Kapildev Yadav R/o vill - Govindpur, ward no. 8, P.s.- Sahebpurkamal, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Randhir Kumar No 1, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-05-2025 Heard Mr. Randhir Kumar No. 1, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sahebpurkamal P.S. Case No. 251 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 02.08.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 109, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons came at the Bathan of the informant and started abusing her. They also made firing in order to terrorize and further set free the buffalo of the informant. The accused petitioner also assaulted the son of the

2/4 informant on the head of the informant 's son due to which he sustained head injuries.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. that there admitted land dispute between the parties and there is case and counter case. Although, there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he has assaulted the son of the informant but it appears from the order of co-accused person namely Mantu Yadav who has been granted bail by the learned Court below itself which suggests that there is no injury report available in the case diary that the son of the informant has received any injury and apart from that co-accused persons namely Kapildev Yadav and Nikhil Yadav @ Nikhil Kumar have been granted the privilege of bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 16517 of 2025.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and no injury report available on record that the son of the informant has received any injury and apart from that co-accused persons have been granted the privilege of bail by a Coordinate Bench of

3/4 this Court, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his 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/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. IV, Begusarai in connection with Sahebpurkamal P.S. Case No. 251 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-

(1) Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

4/4 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) Ibrar//- U