← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./31937/2025bail granted

Raghuvansh Yadav @ Suresh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2025-06-17Mr. Justice Sourendra Pandey4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31937 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-537 Year-2024 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Raghuvansh Yadav @ Suresh yadav S/o Saryug Yadav R/o vill - Sukhasan ward no. 8, P.S.- Madhepura, Distt.- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dinesh Prasad Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mohammad Sufyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 33/2025 arising out of Madhepura P.S. Case No. 537/2024 registered for the offences under Section 302/34 of I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant's wife had gone to the field and when she did not return, the informant tried to locate her and he was subsequently informed that a body was lying on the road and slipper was also found, which belonged to the informant's wife. It is further alleged that on search, they found the wife of the informant dead and there was a cut on the front and back side of the neck. It is further alleged that the petitioner along with his son was seen roaming around

2/4 the house of the informant and Gaurav Kumar (co-accused) was also seen carrying a sword. It is lastly alleged that all the accused persons hatched a conspiracy and killed the informant's wife.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case as there is no eye-witness to the alleged incident. Learned counsel further submits that there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has earlier moved before this Court for grant of bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 78020/2024 which was rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.12.2024, however, liberty was granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. Learned counsel further submits that the charges have already been framed vide order dated 08.04.2025. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail and is in custody since 25.05.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was found involved in the commission of murder of informant's wife and the informant even had previous enmity

3/4 with the petitioner and hence, the petitioner should not be granted privilege of bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that barring suspicion, there is no material to connect the petitioner with the present case and also the fact that the charges have already been framed, let the petitioner above-named be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Session Judge-IV, Madhepura in connection with Sessions Trial No. 33/2025 arising out of Madhepura P.S. Case No. 537/2024 subject to the conditions :- a. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.

b. The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.

c. 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 the cancelled by the court concerned.

d. The Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any

4/4 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 aforementioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) tusharika/- U T