Amarjeet Kumar @ Amarjeet Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37843 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-494 Year-2024 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Amarjeet Kumar @ Amarjeet Yadav S/o- Satyanarayan Yadav Resident of village- Aghori Bigha PS- Tekari District-Gaya 2.
Ranjeet Kumar S/o- Satyanarayan Yadav Resident of village- Aghori Bigha PS- Tekari District-Gaya 3.
Sanjit Kumar S/o- Satyanarayan Yadav Resident of village- Aghori Bigha PS- Tekari District-Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Surendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2025 Heard Mr. Surendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Tekari P.S. Case No. 494 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 01.12.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 127(1), 127(2), 115(2), 109, 74, 303(2), 308(3), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, the petitioners along with other co-accused persons came to the informant, threatened the informant and demanded extortion. On 29.11.2024, informant, his son and daughter were collecting paddy on agricultural land. Then, all accused persons came there assaulted informant, his son
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37843 of 2025(2) dt.18-06-2025 2/3 and daughter. It is further alleged that petitioner no.2 touched the body of the informant's daughter and one co-accused torn her blouse with bad intention.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the FIR itself that due to admitted land dispute, petitioners have been made accused in the present case. There is case and counter case. Although, there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he has assaulted the informant but injury report of the informant (Annexure- 2 / 2/1) suggest that injuries are simple in nature.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that petitioners have clean antecedent, there is admitted land dispute, there is case and counter case and as per injury report of the informant, injuries are simple in nature, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37843 of 2025(2) dt.18-06-2025 3/3 the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-VI, Gaya in connection with Tekari P.S. Case No. 494 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ 482 (2) of the BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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) priyanka/- U T