Prabhu Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.23331 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -32 Year- 2016 Thana -MADHUBAN DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================
1. Prabhu Prasad Yadav Son of Vishwanath Jee Yadav, Resident of villageSidheshwar Colony, Jhabua (M.P.) .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binay Kumar,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 04-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Madhuban P.S.Case No. 32 of 2016 registered for offences punishable under Sections 440 D.M.C. Act and 3/4 Damage to Public Property Act.
The prosecution case is that on the basis of the written report of the informant, Circle Officer, Madhuban, stating therein that on secret information he reached the place of occurrence where he found that driver and the owner was damaging the Dam of river Burhi Gandak ( Sikrahana River) through J.C.B. Machine No. B.R.01 G.A.-2630, causing loss to the Government property.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a driver of the said J.C.B. Machine
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23331 of 2016 (3) dt.04-08-2016 2/2 and on the basis of the instructions of Mukhiya of the said Gram Panchyhat, the work near the breach, was being done smoothly. He further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as is evident from para-3 of this petitioner and he is not responsible for any overt act. He submits that he is not the owner of the J.C.B. Machine, as such he has been falsely implicated. However, learned A.P.P. submits that the petitioner along with the owner was found to be taking away the soil near the said breach in the said J.C.B. as is evident from various paras of the case diary, hence, opposes the prayer for bail. Be that as it may, since the petitioner was a driver of the said J.C.B.
Machine, let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of eight weeks from today be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Madhuban P.S.Case No. 32/2016 to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- IV, Motihari , East Champaran, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Nilu Agrawal, J) Sudha/- U T