Kritiyanand Yadav @ Krityanand Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.62952 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -326 Year- 2017 Thana -NARPATGANJ District- ARRARIA ====================================================== Kritiyanand Yadav @ Krityanand Yadav, Son of Late Sahdeo Yadav, resident of Village- Bibiganj Ward No. 08, Police Station- Narpatganj, District- Araria.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
Petitioner seeks bail in Narpatganj P.S. Case No. 326/2017, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 354, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegation is that while informant along with his father, brother and sister-in-law (Bhabhi) were going to his field, petitioner and other co-accused came and started abusing and assaulting them. Allegation against petitioner is that he assaulted informant's brother with Farsa on his head causing head injury. It has been submitted that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. There is land dispute between the parties and there is case and counter case.
Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He is in custody
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.62952 of 2018 (2) dt.25-10-2018 2/2 since 30.06.2018.
Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria in connection with Narpatganj P.S. Case No. 326/2017, subject to the conditions:
(1.) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.
(2.) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bonds.
(3.) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
(S. Kumar, J) Vinita/- U T