Dilchand Yadav @ Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48402 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-561 Year-2024 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Dilchand Yadav @ Rajesh Kumar S/o- Vishundev Yadav Village- Balthar, P.O. and P.S. Barachatti, District-Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Md Jubair Ansari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 25-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences under Section 111, 317(4) of B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, on getting confidential information, the police conducted a raid at the repair shop of one Dilchand @ Rajesh (petitioner) and saw that two motorcycles were standing at the shop. On being asked, both the petitioner and co-accused were unable to produce the relevant documents for the motorcycles and they disclosed that the named accused persons namely, Rohit, Vikash, Vicky and Ravi were the persons who supplied them the motorcycles. They further disclosed that
2/4 Deepak Kumar used to purchase the motorcycle. Thereafter, the police went to the house of the Pradip Manjhi and recovered two motorcycles and accordingly, the FIR has been lodged, as the petitioner did not produce the paper relating to the recovered motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that as per the FIR two motorcycles are said to have been recovered from the shop of the petitioner, however, it is nowhere stated that the motorcycles were the stolen motorcycles. It is also submitted that similarly situated co-accused person, Rupan Manjhi, has already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 37969 of 2025 as well as co-accused, namely, Deepak Kumar and Pradip Manjhi have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 28.05.2025, 04.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 33659 of 2025 and 40925/2025 respectively. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 28.12.2024.
3/4
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. 6.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that the petitioner has clean antecedent, let the petitioner abovenamed be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 561/2024 subject to the conditions :- a. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.
b. The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
c. In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
d. The Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has
4/4 concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the afore-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) tusharika/- U T