Arjun Yadav And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.530 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2018 Thana- GHOSI District- Jehanabad ======================================================
1. Arjun Yadav, Son of Late Siyacharan yadav
2. Rudal Yadav, Son of Late Siiyacharan Yadav
3. Sunita Devi, Wife of Rudal Yadav All are resident of Village-Meera Bigha, P.S. Goshi, Dist.-Jehanabad ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party :
Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 31-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 504, 506, 427, 379 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Ghosi P.S. Case No. 68 of 2018.
3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the backdrop of ongoing land dispute and there is case and counter case between the parties. No specific accusation of assault has been made individually.
4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioners' arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Judge 1st, Jehanabad in connection with Ghosi P.S. Case No. 68 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. and with further conditions --
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.530 of 2019(2) dt.31-01-2019 2/2 (i) That one of the bailors of each of the petitioners shall be their close relatives.
(ii) That the petitioners shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.
(iii) That petitioner no. 3 will be well represented and petitioner nos. 1 and 2 shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.
(iv) That the petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make themselves available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. BT/Chandran (Vikash Jain, J) U T