Amarjeet Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28102 of 2025 Arising out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2025 Thana- ALOULI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Amarjeet Yadav S/o Ram Pukar Yadav @ Pukar Yadav Resident of VillageTilakpur, PS- Tilkeshwar, District- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Madan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 27-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Allauli P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No. 347 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 309(4), 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. He has no criminal antecedent.
3. The prosecution case is to the effect that while the informant was going on his motorcycle, three miscreants stopped his motorcycle and started abusing. It is alleged that Rs. 15,000/- was taken away from the informant along with his mobile phone. The informant further stated that when the villagers came there, the said three persons fled away and the villagers disclosed their names to be Amarjeet Yadav
2/4 (Petitioner), Muskan Paswan and Gautam Paswan.
4. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case by the covillagers due to personal differences. It has further been stated that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner. The allegations even taken on the face value, are general and omnibus in nature. It has also been submitted that no recovery has been made from the petitioner and the mobile of the informant, during the course of investigation, is stated to have been returned by one Laxman Kumar. The learned counsel has further submitted that a similarly situated co-accused, namely, Muskan Kumar has been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 16.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 29599 of 2025 and Gautam Kumar @ Gautam Paswan @ Krishna Kumar Paswan has been granted bail vide order dated 19.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 31809 of 2025. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody since 08.02.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and has stated that the petitioner and other co-accused have snatched away the money and mobile of the informant and they were identified by the
3/4 villagers.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and taking into account the fact that no article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the clean antecedent and also bail granted to the similarly situated co-accused, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria/Court concerned in connection with Alauli P.S.Case No. 54 of 2025 corresponding to G.R. No. 347 of 2025,subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the learned Trial Court.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be canceled by the Court concerned.
4/4 (iv) And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for the purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) Vikash/- U T