Sanjay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40571 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2025 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka ====================================================== 1.
Sanjay Yadav S/O Late Bateshwar Yadav Resident of Village-Dharampur, PS-Amarpur, Distt-Banka 2.
Antu Yadav @ Antu Kumar S/O Late Bateshwar Yadav Resident of VillageDharampur, PS-Amarpur, Distt-Banka 3.
Gyani Devi W/O Sanjay Yadav Resident of Village-Dharampur, PSAmarpur, Distt-Banka 4.
Gita Devi @ Rita Devi W/O Viveka Yadav Resident of Village-Dharampur, PS-Amarpur, Distt-Banka 5.
Rubi Devi W/O Antu Yadav Resident of Village-Dharampur, PS-Amarpur, Distt-Banka 6.
Krishna Yadav @ Krishna Deo Yadav @ Krishnadeo Kumar Yadav S/O Sanjay Yadav Resident of Village-Dharampur, PS-Amarpur, Distt-Banka 7.
Janak Yadav @ Janak Prasad Yadav S/O Late Sri Lal Yadav Resident of Village-Katchatar, PS-Rajoun, Distt-Banka 8.
Raghu Yadav @ Raghu Nandan Yadav S/O Late Sri Lal Yadav Resident of Village-Katchatar, PS-Rajoun, Distt-Banka 9.
Mukesh Yadav S/O Late Sugdeo Yadav Resident of Village-Katchatar, PSRajoun, Distt-Banka ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2025 Heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. Rina Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No.136 of 2025 for the
2/4 offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 110, 117(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 203.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged that when she alongwith her husband were arranging straw on her land. In the meantime, the petitioners came and assaulted the informant and her husband. When the daughter and nephew of the informant came to rescue, the accused persons assaulted them also.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. There is case and counter between the parties. It appears from the FIR that due to admitted land dispute the present occurrence has taken place. Although the petitioners are named in the FIR but there is no specific allegation against them rather the allegation levelled against them are general and omnibus.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, petitioners have clean antecedent and there is case and counter case between the parties and there is no specific allegation against them, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of
3/4 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 the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No.136 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 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
4/4 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) Suruchi/- U T