Pappu Yadav @ Pappu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28574 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2020 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== PAPPU YADAV @ PAPPU KUMAR Son of Bishundeo Yadav Resident of Village- Khairamath- G, Ward No. 13, P.S.- Jai Nagar, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Gaganeo Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasiya ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 23-11-2020 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State, through Video Conferencing.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Jainagar Police Station Case No. 107 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341/323/379/384/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1B)/26 of the Arms Act. The prosecution story, as per the First Information Report, is that the petitioner, along with other co-accused persons, riding on two motorcycles, arrived at the door of the informant and assaulted him by fists and slaps and the petitioner, having pistol in his hand, tried to open fire on the informant, but the informant managed to save himself and upon alarm being raised, neighbours came there and caught hold the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28574 of 2020(2) dt.23-11-2020 2/3 petitioner along with pistol, while others succeeded in fleeing away.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case inasmuch as the motorcycle and the fire-arm, allegedly recovered from the possession of the petitioner by the villagers was handed over to the police by them and the same has not been recovered by the police authorities. He further submits that the motorcycle in question belongs to the petitioner and the documents regarding ownership of the motorcycle was produced by him before the learned Court below, which would be evident from the impugned order itself. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 02.04.2020, having no criminal antecedent. After having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record and the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 02.04.2020, having no criminal antecedent, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. This application is, accordingly, allowed.
Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail, upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28574 of 2020(2) dt.23-11-2020 3/3 connection with Jainagar Police Station Case No. 107 of 2020. It is further made clear that at the time of furnishing bail bonds, all the parties shall follow the guidelines regarding social distancing.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √