Jay Prakash Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39022 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2022 Thana- CHAKAI District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.
Jay Prakash Yadav son of Dhaneshwar Yadav Village- Dhawana PsChandramandih Dist- Jamui 2.
Devnandan Yadav @ Devan Yadav son of Janardhan Yadav VillageDhawana Ps- Chandramandih Dist- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prakash Mahto For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Bharat Bhushan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
The petitioners seek bail in connection with Chakai P.S. Case No. 42 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the IPC.
As per allegation, it is alleged that the petitioners and other accused snatched cash of ₹1,20,700/- and a mobile from the informant.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioners are not named in the
2/4 FIR and till date no T.I.P. has been conducted. It is further submitted that no recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioners. The petitioners have been languishing in jail since 13.03.2023.
It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that earlier the petitioner no. 1 is made accused in three other cases and petitioner no.2 is made accused in four other cases also.
It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioners have not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one.
However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioners for bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is allowed, directing the petitioners, abovenamed, to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the ₹ like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, in connection with Chakai P.S. Case No. 42 of 2022, on the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners will make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required.
3/4 (ii) The petitioners will undertake that investigation/trial will not get hampered on account of their absence or non-cooperation. they must be available to the police or the court whenever their presence is required. (iii) The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.
(iv) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners after hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioners have concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same.
(v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
Ld. counsel for the petitioners are directed to remove all the defects, if any, pointed out by the office within a period of one month and the Registry is directed to issue the certified
4/4 copy of this order only after removal of office objections. (Jitendra Kumar, J) Amrendra/- U T