Raja Ram Yadav @ Rajaram Yadav @ Raja Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28896 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2025 Thana- DEV District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Raja Ram Yadav @ Rajaram Yadav @ Raja Kumar Yadav S/O Surith Yadav R/O Village- Dhobi Bag, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Durgesh Nandan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP For the Informant :
Ms. Mukul Kumari, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 06-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Deo P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 115(2), 352, 316(2), 318(4), 319(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that the informant alleges that petitioner along with co-accused Binod Rajak, induced him to apply for a government loan of Rs. 10,00,000/- promising a subsidy of Rs. 5,00,000/- and took Rs. 1,00,000 in advance for the same. However, when the loan was not sanctioned, both accused refused to return the money.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28896 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 2/3 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case and the allegation levelled against him are false and concocted. Learned counsel further submitted that there is no receipts or agreement or written acknowledgment that proves the petitioner ever received the said amount in question. Learned counsel further submitted that informant has alleged that Rs. 17,000/- has been paid to the petitioner by Phone Pay but the said allegation is incorrect and no amount has been transferred in the account of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner is, however, ready to deposit a sum of Rs. 17,000/-, subject to the final outcome of the trial. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 11.03.2025 and has one criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. However, after arguing at length, learned counsel for the informant does not raise objection as the petitioner is ready to return the amount of Rs. 17,000/- subject to the final outcome of the trial.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and since the petitioner is ready to return Rs. 17,000/- to the informant as also the period of custody
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28896 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 3/3 undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Deo P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025, subject to the following conditions: (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(III) Petitioner shall pay Rs. 17,000/- to the informant at the time of furnishing bail bonds.
8. It goes without saying that the aforesaid amount to be returned by the petitioner shall remain subject to the final outcome of the case.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T