Sogarath Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28502 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2025 Thana- DARBHANGA SADAR DistrictDarbhanga ====================================================== Sogarath Yadav Son of Late Prabhu Yadav Resident of Village- Sara Mohanpur, P.S.- Sadar, District- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Kalpana, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Abhay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner is in custody since 26.02.2025 in a case in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.19 of 2025 registered for an offence punishable under Sections 140(3),3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the allegation in the FIR, the informant gave her statement before the police alleging that on 09.01.2025 at about 4:00 P.M two persons namely, Rajesh Kumar Yadav and Pankaj Kumar taken away her husband and he did not return. It is further alleged that on 22.12.2024 in the night, a dispute was made between the husband of the informant and her villager, namely, Sanjay Mahto when she asked about her husband, the said accused persons, namely, Rajesh Kumar Yadav and Pankaj
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28502 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/3 Kumar said that they left her husband at Ganj Chowk and came back.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR, name of the petitioner has been surfaced during the investigation only on the basis that he is the father of the coaccused, Manish Yadav. He next submits that during the investigation, the son of the petitioner, namely, Manish Yadav was shown in the C.C.T.V. footage and the mobile tower location of the said Manish Yadav has also been located and except that there is no other material found on record against the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is under custody since 26.02.2025. He next submits that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. From perusal of the First Information Report and impugned order dated 11.03.2025, it appears that in para-31 of the case diary, I.O. has mentioned that Manish Yadav, who is son of the accused petitioner was shown in the C.C.T.V. footage and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28502 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 3/3 para-47 of the case diary shows that the tower location of Manish Yadav, who is son of the accused petitioner and tower location of the informant's husband was found from the same place. So, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the fact that petitioner is not named in the FIR and name of the petitioner has been transpired during the investigation because of the reason that his son was shown in the said C.C.T.V footage and his tower location was also found along with husband of the informant from the same place and also the fact that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent, let the above named petitioner be released on bail, on his furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.19 of 2025 with a condition that petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Harshita/- U T