Dayanand Yadav @ Dayanand Kumar Yadav @ Dayanand Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46246 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2024 Thana- CHANAN District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== 1.

Dayanand Yadav @ Dayanand Kumar Yadav @ Dayanand Kumar S/oBaleshwar Yadav 2.

Baleshwar Yadav S/o- Late Bhagwat Yadav 3.

Pappu Yadav @ Pappu Kumar S/o- Baleshwar Yadav 4.

Anita Devi W/o- Pappu Yadav.

All are R/o Village- Hilsa (Kodavriya) Ps- Chandradip Dist- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Pappu Yadav S/o- Beni Yadav R/o Village- Mahuliya Ps- Chanan DistLakhisarai ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-07-2025 Heard Mr.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Chanan P.S.Case No.86 of 2024, FIR dated 16.08.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2),318(4),316(2)/3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Allegation against the petitioners is that they received Rs. 1,10,000/- through the bank transaction from the

2/4 informant and the informant has also given Rs. 90,500/- (Ninety Thousand Five Hundred) for purchasing the motorcycle in question but the same was transferred in the account of the Agency for performance of the marriage of the son, namely, Dayanand Yadav @ Dayanand Kumar Yadav @ Daya Nand Kumar, son of Baleshwar Yadav with the sister of the informant and due to some dispute the marriage was not performed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Although, the petitioners have received Rs. 1,10,000/- through the bank transaction from the informant for performance of the marriage of the son, namely, Dayanand Yadav @ Dayanand Kumar Yadav @ Daya Nand Kumar, son of Baleshwar Yadav with the sister of the informant and due to some dispute the marriage was not performed and the informant has filed the present case only to harass the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instruction, fairly submits that the petitioner is ready to return Rs.1,10,000/- (One Lakh Ten Thousand) which they have received from the informant in bank account.

3/4

5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that apart from the aforesaid, the informant has also given Rs. 90,500/- (Ninety Thousand Five Hundred) for purchasing the motorcycle in question but the same was transferred in the account of the Motorcycle Agency.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and petitioners have clean antecedent, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their 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 learned A.C.J.M.-I, Lakhisarai in connection with Chanan P.S.Case No.86 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:- (I) At the time of furnishing bail bond, the petitioners shall deposit Rs.1,10,000/- (One Lakh Ten Thousand)by way of demand draft in favour of the informant, namely, Pappu Yadav and the learned court below is directed to hand over the said

4/4 demand draft to the informant, namely, Pappu Yadav or his representative.

(II) 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 bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.

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

(IV) 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 antecedents, 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) Nitesh/- U T