Vijay Yadav And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37757 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -89 Year- 2014 Thana -ROSERA District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================

1. Vijay Yadav

2. Santosh Yadav Both sons of Satya Yadav .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyam Bharti For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 13-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Rosera P.S. Case No. 89 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that these two petitioners are not named in the First Information Report with regard to the theft of pumpset and in the confessional statement made before the Police by one Bipin Singh, the name of these two petitioners has surfaced.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner No. 1 cannot be implicated in the present case on basis of confessional statement of co-accused made before the Police which has no evidentiary value. However, it is submitted in the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37757 of 2014 (3) dt.13-04-2015 P2/2 confessional statement made before the Police by the said Bipin Singh that the pumpset was recovered from the conscious possession of the Santosh Yadav, petitioner No. 2 herein. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner No. 2, it is accordingly rejected.

So far as petitioner No. 1 is concerned, let the petitioner Vijay Yadav, in the event of his arrest / surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the each amount to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M., Rosera, in connection with Rosera P.S. Case No. 89 of 2014 , subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C. (Anjana Mishra, J) Saif/- U