Jay Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27244 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2024 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ====================================================== 1.
Jay Kumar Yadav S/o Kapildev Yadav R/o Village- Raghunathpur Ward No13, P.S.-Bhargama, District- Araria 2.
Budhiya Devi W/o Abhinandan Yadav R/o Village- Raghunathpur Ward No13, P.S.-Bhargama, District- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Madhav Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 19-05-2025 Heard Mr. Madhav Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Aditya Naryan Singh-I, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 201 of 2024 instituted under Sections 103, 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 lodged on 01.07.2024 by the informant, Bachha Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the accused persons armed variously came and on the order of Ram Vilash Yadav, Chndan Yadav shot an arrow on her husband who fainted. Thereafter, Kapildeo Yadav hitting him indiscriminately. As the informant and villagers reached her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27244 of 2025(2) dt.19-05-2025 2/3 husband, he was found dead. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the main allegation of giving order as also the assault is/are on Ram Vilash Yadav, Chandan Yadav and Kapildeo Yadav, they becing the family members, have been roped in, petitioner no. 2 is a lady.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer stating that the all of them variously armed, surrounded the informant's husband whereafter, the killing took place.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also that specific allegation is against named persons as recorded above, these two petitioners have no criminal antecedent, one of them is lady, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Let the petitioners be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the subordinate court within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 201 of 2024 to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Araria subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also the other conditions.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27244 of 2025(2) dt.19-05-2025 3/3 (i) one of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioners who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation and make themselves available to the police as and when required;
(iv) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioners shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T