Bhikhar Yadav @ Bhikhari Yadav And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.66499 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -87 Year- 2018 Thana -SASARAM MUFFSIL District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ======================================================

1. BHIKHAR YADAV @ BHIKHARI YADAV, Son of Late Sripati Yadav,

2. Raushan Yadav, Son of Bhikhar Yadav, Both residents of Village- Jaipur, P.S.- Sasaram (M), District- Rohtas.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Narsingh Tanti ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 26-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioners seek bail in connection with Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No.87 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

Informant has alleged in his written complaint against FIR named accused of indiscriminate firing. Allegation against petitioner is causing fire arm injury on the right hand of Mantu Yadav and against Bhikham Yadav, there is no allegation of causing any overt act.

All injury are simple in nature. Petitioner No.1 is in custody since 02.07.2018 and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.66499 of 2018 (2) dt.26-11-2018 2/2 petitioner No.2 is in custody since 06.08.2018. There is no criminal antecedent except one against the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let all the petitioners named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Sasaram, District-Rohtas in connection with Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No.87 of 2018, with following conditions :-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned.

(2) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the Court and their absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel their bail bond.

(3) If the petitioners 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 petitioners.

(S. Kumar, J) Sanjeev/- U T