Jay Prakash Yadav @ Badlu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67395 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2021 Thana- BAUNSI District- Banka ====================================================== JAY PRAKASH YADAV @ BADLU YADAV Son of Late Logi Yadav Resident of Village - Sarana, P.S.- Baunsi, District - Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate Mr.Ugranath Mallik, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, Advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Om Prakash Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-05-2022 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Sri Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bounsi P.S. Case No. 165 of 2021 registered under Sections 342, 307, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 02.10.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case and has antecedent of seven cases out of which the petitioner has been acquitted in four cases, as such presently he has antecedent of three cases.

Learned Senior Counsel submits that the informant alleges that on 01.08.2021 at about 07.30 PM Jay Prakash Yadav

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67395 of 2021(2) dt.09-05-2022 2/3 alongwith named accused persons surrounded the informant and assaulted him while he was returning home. It is further alleged that on order of this petitioner Nirmal Yadav fired upon the informant and thereafter he was taken to hospital for treatment. The learned senior counsel submits that from bare perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. it would manifest that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case by alleging that it was on his order that his son Nirmal fired upon the informant which caused injury on the waist of the informant. It is submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that a person who intend to fire will wait for orders. The learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer for bail of the petitioner but are not able to meet the submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is merely an order giver and not the assailant.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 02.10.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted and is alleged to be an order giver, let the petitioner above named is directed to be released 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 the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Bounsi P.S. Case No.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67395 of 2021(2) dt.09-05-2022 3/3 165 of 2021, if the learned court below comes to a conclusion that the petitioner after his release is trying to delay the trial in any manner, the court below shall forthwith cancel the bail bonds after recording reasons.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) ved/- U T