Meghu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46504 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -267 Year- 2018 Thana -BARACHATTI District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Meghu Yadav Son of Late Ramdayal Yadav Resident of Village - Dhodhi, P.S. - Mohanpur, District - Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S. Ehteshamuddin, APP 56. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 23-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Barachatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 267/2018, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 323, 325, 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner and informant are Gotia. There is land dispute between them. From the F.I.R. itself, it is apparent that there is general and omnibus allegation against this petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioner, named above, within six

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46504 of 2018 (2) dt.23-08-2018 2/2 weeks from today, in connection with Barachatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 267/2018, he shall be released on anticipatory 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 A.C.J.M., Sherghati, Gaya, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will automatically cancel bail bond of the petitioner and (3) if petitioner tamper with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. (Sanjay Priya, J.) Rakhi U T