Md. Javed v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33331 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2025 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.

Md. Javed Son of Md. Riyajul, Resident of village- Simraha, Ward no. 6, PS- Madhepura, Dist- Madhepura.

2.

Md. Miraj Son of Md. Tammana, Resident of village- Simraha, Ward no. 7, PS- Madhepura, Dist- Madhepura.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 152 of 2025 dated 03.02.2025 instituted for the offence punishable under Section 304(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. As per the prosecution story, three unknown miscreants snatched Rs. 33,150/- cash and one OPPO mobile from the informant and fled away.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled in the FIR is false and fabricated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33331 of 2025(2) dt.26-05-2025 2/3 and petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Petitioners are not named in the FIR and their name transpired on the basis of confessional statement of the coaccused person namely, Raja Kumar, which has no evidentiary value. No TIP has been conducted by the prosecution as yet. No incriminating article has been recocered either from the house or from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner no. 1 has clean antecedent while petitioner no. 2 carries one criminal antecedent, however, he is on bail in the said case. Petitioners are in custody since 14.02.2025. He lastly submits that after completion of investigation, chargesheet has been submitted against the petitioners.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as petitioners' period under custody, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail after framing of charge, if not framed as yet. Accordingly, let the petitioners, above-named, be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33331 of 2025(2) dt.26-05-2025 3/3 Madhepura, in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 152 of 2025, on further conditions:

(i) One of the bailors should be close relative of the petitioners.

(ii) Petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every fixed date and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds may be cancelled by the learned trial Court.

(S. B. Pd. Singh, J) Shahnawaz/- U T