Ranjan Yadav @ Ranju Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72168 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2020 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ====================================================== RANJAN YADAV @ RANJU YADAV Son of Nityanand Yadav Resident of Village - Madhura Uttar, Police Station - Narpatganj, District - Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukesh Kumar Rana, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nirmala Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-05-2022 Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks of starting of Court proceeding in physical mode in normal course.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence under Sections 395 of the Indian Penal Code and charge sheet has been submitted under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code.

Some miscreants are said to have snatched away Rs. 2, 45,035/- from the dickey of motorcyle of Sanjeev Yadav. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner has not been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72168 of 2021(2) dt.10-05-2022 2/3 named in the F.I.R. but merely on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused, Sushant Kumar, he has been made accused in this case. He further submits that, in fact, neither anything incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner nor the petitioner has been put on T.I.P. by the prosecution as yet. He further submits that the police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet in this case against the petitioner. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 28.01.2021.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries six more cases other than the present one.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the, above named, petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 116 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. No. 157 of 2021 with the following conditions:-

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be canceled by the Court below.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72168 of 2021(2) dt.10-05-2022 3/3

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) brajesh/- U T