Patna High CourtCR. MISC./59754/2024bail granted

Munna Yadav @ Mannu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2024-10-26Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59754 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2024 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan ====================================================== Munna Yadav @ Mannu Yadav Son of Hare Ram Chaudhary Resident of Village- Naarhan P.S.- Raghunathpur, Dist.- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 31 of 2024 dated 10.02.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 413 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, on seeing police, four miscreants ridden on two motorcycles were trying to flee away but one person was apprehended with motorcycle whereas three persons were managed to flee away. The apprehended persons disclosed their names as Munna Yadav (the petitioner), Nagendra Sah and Satyendra Sahni. On being searched, he disclosed that the said motorcycles was stolen.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59754 of 2024(3) dt.26-10-2024 2/2 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is not the owner of the said motorcycle. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has surfaced in this case in the confessional statement of the co-accused, Samir Ansari. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has three criminal antecedents in which he is on bail as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 06.06.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Siwan in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 31 of 2024.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T