Ramesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20409 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2022 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Ramesh Yadav S/O- Nand Lal Yadav R/O- Village- Sahbaj Kuli, Chak Sahbaj Kuli, P.S.- Monhar, Dist.- Gazipur, (UTTAR Pradesh) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudhanshu Shekhar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dinara (Bhanas) P.S Case No. 77 of 2022 dated 13.03.2022 registered for the offence punishable u/s 406, 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner who is working as as Weight Man Supervisor in ABS Export (India) Pvt. Ltd., Sasaram is alleged to have sold 2022 pieces of chicks worth Rs. 4,70,887/- at the poultry farm of Manish Kumar illegally in the night which was against the rule of the company.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20409 of 2024(2) dt.15-04-2024 2/3 this case. It is stated that the informant and the owner of the Poultry farm namely Manish Kumar in connivance with each other have illegally sold the alleged chicks and have wrongly implicated the petitioner in the present case. It is further submitted that the delivery challan has been prepared in three copies, one copy is given to the farmer, second copy is given to the buyer and third copy remains in the company but the owner of the poultry farm and the sales manager never informed about the such sale and purchase. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, as well as the nature of allegation, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Rohtas at Sasaram, in connection with Dinara (Bhanas) P.S Case No. 77 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20409 of 2024(2) dt.15-04-2024 3/3

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) jyoti/- U T