Raghu Narayan Yadav @ Raghu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.62287 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2017 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== Raghu Narayan Yadav @ Raghu Yadav S/o Late Ram Narayan Yadav @ Chhutharu Yadav, R/o Village- Naua Bakhar, P.S.- Kishanpur, DistrictSupaul. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 31-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 16.10.2017 in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 190/2017 for offences punishable under Section 307 and other allied Sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, is that while he was returning to his house, eight miscreants in three motorcycles intercepted and out of which six accused named in the First Information Report including the petitioner started assaulting the informant with fists and slaps. It is alleged that the petitioner fired on the informant which touched his

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.62287 of 2017(3) dt.31-01-2018 2/3 body, chest and hand, but the main assailant is co-accused Bechan Yadav, who fired and hit him on the chest. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was political rivalry, he has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case and that the main assailant was co-accused Bechan Yadav. He submits that the injury specifies only bruises to have been caused by firing of the petitioner, charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no allegation of tampering with the prosecution witnesses by the petitioner.

However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating therein that the petitioner does not have a clean antecedent as one more case is pending against him. 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, Supaul, in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 190/2017, subject to the following conditions :

(i) One of the bailors would be a close relative of the petitioner having sufficient immovable property, who

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.62287 of 2017(3) dt.31-01-2018 3/3 will file an affidavit stating his relationship with the petitioner.

(ii) 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) Rajesh/- U T