Patna High CourtCR. MISC./40896/2024bail granted

Ranveer Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-09Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40896 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1234 Year-2022 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Ranveer Yadav S/o Late Ganesh Yadav R/o Village Kumar Chakki PS Khagaria Muffasil, Dist.- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Indrajit Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Rajendra Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-08-2024 Heard Mr. Indrajit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajendra Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 09.01.2024, in connection with Suppl. Khagaria (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 1234 of 2022, FIR dated 20.11.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 427, 307, 504, 506 and 385 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The petitioner and other co-accused persons are alleged to have assaulted the informant and his nephew. It is further alleged that they have fired upon the nephews of the informant, namely, Ankush Kumar and Bipin Yadav.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he has fired upon

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40896 of 2024(4) dt.09-08-2024 2/3 the victim. He further submits that although the victim has received the injury but the injury report of the victim suggests that the injury is simple in nature caused by the fire arms. He further submits that co-accused persons, namely, Mritunjay Yadav and Shivnandan Yadav have been granted regular bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.05.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 21487 of 2023 and co-accused person Gulo Yadav, Rabo Yadav @ Ravindra Yadav and Nilesh Yadav have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.09.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 58806 of 2023. He further submits that the police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet in this case against the petitioner. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 09.01.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he has fired upon the victim and apart from that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the, above named, petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40896 of 2024(4) dt.09-08-2024 3/3 sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Khagaria in connection with Suppl. Khagaria (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 1234 of 2022 with the following conditions:- (i) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be canceled by the Court below.

(ii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

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 purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) ajay/- U T