Chhedi Yadav @ Chadi Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57932 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2023 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria ====================================================== CHHEDI YADAV @ CHADI YADAV SON OF LATE BHOLA YADAV RESIDENT OF JANGALI MANDAL TOLA, P.S. - KHAGARIA (MUFASSIL), DISTRICT - KHAGARIA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Harsh Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 04-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 25(1-b)AA, 26(i)(ii) and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioner along with others is of engaging in making illegal weapons.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. From the perusal of the FIR and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57932 of 2023(4) dt.04-12-2023 2/3 seizure list would reveal that while the FIR claims that the maize field belongs to the petitioner, in the seizure list it is stated that the field in under cultivation of petitioner as a Bataidar. It is categorically stated that the petitioner has no concern with the maize field and is neither the owner of the field nor is a Bataidar of the field and the field in question belongs to one Amit Yadav. He further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the seized items and the seizure is in teeth of provisions of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. It is stated that petitioner was not arrested from the place of occurrence but from his residence and has been falsely implicated in the case only on account of criminal antecedent. He is languishing in judicial custody since 05.03.2023.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail after framing of charge, if not framed. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57932 of 2023(4) dt.04-12-2023 3/3 the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Khagaria in connection with Khagaria P.S. Case No. 216 of 2023. (Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Arish/- U T