Chiku Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45429 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2021 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna ====================================================== CHIKU YADAV S/O SANCHIT RAI @ RAMASHISH RAI R/o- Kothwan, P.S.- Khagaul, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anant Kumar 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-05-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual mode.

Counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 341, 342, 364(A), 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution case, in short, is that the accused persons along with 20 unknown abducted the informant for ransom. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case for oblique reasons. The petitioner is not named in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45429 of 2021(2) dt.20-05-2022 2/3 the F.I.R. His name has come in this case during course of investigation. The informant had entered into an agreement with the co-accused in respect of sale of piece of land. Subsequently it was detected that the land in question belonged to some other person. When he came to know about this agreement between the petitioner and the informant, said person instituted F.I.R. against the informant, which is Annexure 2 to the present application. It is further pointed out that there are number of criminal cases of similar nature instituted against the informant. The present case has been instituted only for the reason that the co-accused demanded his money to be returned from the informant, he refused to do so and got the present case instituted against the co-accused.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the complaint case/F.I.R. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. II, Danapur, Patna in connection with Rupaspur P.S. case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45429 of 2021(2) dt.20-05-2022 3/3 No.112/21, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T