Ravindra Yadav @ Ravindra @ Sadhu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49375 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2021 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== RAVINDRA YADAV @ RAVINDRA @ SADHU YADAV Son of Krishna Yadav Resident of Village- Baksoti, Police Station- Govindpur, DistrictNawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Birendra Kumar For the informant :

Mr. Anil Kumar No.1 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Lalan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-04-2022 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Let the defect(s) be removed within two weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S.T. No. 240 of 2021, arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No. 83 of 2021, for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 07.04.2021 the deceased had gone to the petrol pump situated at Baksoti for selling of diesel/petrol. The informant was informed by the deceased on telephone that he will first go to purchase medicine for cow and he will return late because co-accused Ram Pravesh Yadav had called him to show the land situated at Kolja. As the

2/4 deceased did not return till 7.00 P.M., the informant made call on the mobile phone of deceased. He found it to be switched off. Then he made call on mobile phone of co-accused Ram Pravesh Yadav and same was also found switched off. In course of search, the informant met with co-accused Ram Pravesh Yadav at Baksoti market, where the Police arrested him. The dead body of his brother was found near old post office located near river. The informant has alleged that five days back the accused Dular Yadav had threatened his brother to kill him because of long standing dispute between his family and the family of Dular Yadav and as such the accused persons named in the F.I.R. in a planned manner had committed murder of the brother of the informant.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that so far as the present petitioner is concerned, there is no allegation of involvement of petitioner in commission of murder of the brother of the informant in any manner. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in custody since 04.08.2021.

Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant submits that petitioner along with other co-accused

3/4 have conspired to commit murder of the brother of the informant. The petitioner is one of the associates of Dular Yadav and complicity of the petitioner cannot be denied in the commission of murder of brother of the informant. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

Having heard the rival submission of the parties, perused the allegation made in the F.I.R. it appears that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner to be one of the co-accused to have committed murder with common intention that apart in course of investigation only minuscule evidence has been collected against the petitioner, prima facie the petitioner has made out a case to be released on bail. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-X, Nawada in connection with S.T. No. 240 of 2021, arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No. 83 of 2021, subject to the following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned.

4/4

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(4) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall take steps to cancel his bail bonds.

(Purnendu Singh, J) manish/- U T