Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18877/2025bail granted

Rampravesh Yadav @ Damru Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2025-06-18Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18877 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-262 Year-2024 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== Rampravesh Yadav @ Damru Yadav S/O Anandi Yadav R/O Village- Kundri, P.S and Distt.- Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Akash Raj, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Ankur Prakash Sinha, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as also learned counsel for the Informant. Perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 262 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 302, 201 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, the accusation against the petitioner is of being involved in committing murder of the Informant's elder son namely Shankar Singh.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of village politics as well as on suspicion. The

2/4 petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has transpired in this case in course of investigation on the basis of the re-statement of the Informant stating therein that the Informant's son had scuffle with the petitioner wherein a minor altercation took place between them and, thereafter, on the basis of suspicion, the Informant has alleged that the petitioner and his friend has killed his son. He further submits that the petitioner was arrested and his confessional statement was recorded before the police which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. He further submits that except confessional statement, there is nothing against the petitioner.

He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious/physical possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no direct or specific allegation of any overt act against the petitioner rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in judicial custody since 11.05.2024 without any rhymes or reason. The Investigating Officer, after completion of investigation, has submitted chargesheet against the petitioner.

3/4 charge has not been framed as yet.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner again submits that the co-accused namely Guddu Singh @ Jitendra Singh has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 68280 of 2024.

6. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and the Informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner, stating that the offence alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature. The petitioner, in his confessional statement, has also confessed his guilt.

7. Having heard rival contention of both the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the period of custody of the petitioner and the petitioner having no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 262 of 2024, subject to the following conditions;

(i) One of the bailor(s) shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall

4/4 be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the court below.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T