Indradeo Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26094 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -270 Year- 2016 Thana -KATORIA District- BANKA ======================================================

1. Indradeo Yadav, S/o Late Bhuneshwar Yadav, R/o Village- Bela, P.S.- Belhar, District- Banka.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, Advocate.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 06-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is languishing in jail since 10.02.2017 in a case registered for offences punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case as lodged by the informant is that six miscreants including the petitioner suddenly came in between the night of 29-30 September, 2016 and started assaulting by means of 'lathi' and demanded the phone number of the contractor and threatened with dire consequences, if they made contact with any one on phone. It is further alleged that in course of assault they also snatched the mobiles, purse and Adhaar Cards of the informant and his companions and thereafter, they fled away.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26094 of 2017 (2) dt.06-07-2017 2/2 It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and not named in the F.I.R. and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that his name has come on the confessional statement of co-accused, who have already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 28086/2017 along with another accused on 23.06.2017. It is further submitted that the charge sheet has already been submitted but not under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code but other Sections of the Indian Penal Code and UAP and CLA Act.

However, learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- ( Rs. Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Katoriya (Suiya) P.S.Case No. 270 of 2016.

(Nilu Agrawal, J) Sudha/- U T