Sukhal Yadav And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23602 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -488 Year- 2016 Thana -BAGHA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================

1. Sukhlal Yadav, son of late Jokhan Yadav,

2. Rajesh Yadav, son of Sukhal Yadav, Both resident of village- Kumihiya Vishun Purawa, Police Station- Bagaha, District- West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Milind Kumar Mishra, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 26-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Bagaha (Pathkhauli) P.S. Case No. 488 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted that petitioners are not named in the written report. The petitioner No. 1 is Mausa and petitioner No. 2 is Mausera Bhai of the co-accused Baleshwar Yadav who is husband of the deceased. The husband of the deceased has disclosed the name of the petitioners in his confessional statement. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. In the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23602 of 2018 (4) dt.26-06-2018 2/2 event of surrender/arrest of the petitioners, named above, within six weeks from today, in connection with Bagaha (Patkhauli) P.S. Case No. 488 of 2016, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bagaha, East Champaran, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and their absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be liable to cancel their bail bond and (3) if petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners.

(Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- Rohit Kr.

U T