Jhunjhun Yadav @ Heera Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37921 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-291 Year-2021 Thana- RAMPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Jhunjhun Yadav @ Heera Yadav S/o- Binda Yadav R/o Village- Shiriyaghat (Mahadeo Ghat) PS-Civil Line Dist- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2025 Heard Mr.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 22.04.2025 in connection with Rampur P.S. Case No.291 of 2021, F.I.R. dated 06.09.2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147,148,149,307,382,353,333 of IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act.

3. In course of patrolling, the police on receipt of information that two tractors loaded with illegal sand have been seized and kept in the Circuit house, proceeded there. In the meantime, 30-40 persons came there and entered in the Circuit house and started brick batting on the police. It is also alleged that the miscreants made firing at the police, due to which a

2/4 constable also sustained injury. The miscreants also took away the seized tractors. However, some of the accused persons, who were came on motorcycle, left their the motorcycles, in course of fleeing away, which were seized by the police personnel. The local Chaukidar has identified 16 persons, including the petitioner, on CCTV footage.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of identified by the local Chaukidar including the petitioner in the CCTV footage and the injury which is said to have been found on one of the police personnel is simple in nature and save and except the material, the accused person has been identified in the CCTV footage, there is no material and co-accused person, namely, Ravindra Yadav and Amit Kumar have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by the learned court below itself vide order dated 08.07.2022 passed in ABP No.1751/2022 and co-accused person, namely, Raushan Kumar has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 13.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.54287/2024

3/4 and the petitioner is in custody since 22.04.2025.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in both the cases, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.

6. Considering the aforesaid fact, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR and similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by the learned court below itself and also by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Gaya in connection with Rampur P.S. Case No.291 of 2021, 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 cancelled 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

4/4 for cancellation of bail.

(III) 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) Nitesh/- U T