Bablu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61446 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2019 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.

Bablu Yadav 2.

Dablu Yadav 3.

Parsuram Yadav All sons of Shiya Yadav, R/o village- Paura, P.S.- Gogri (Paura), DistrictKhagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shekhar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant : Mr. Binod Kumar, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 24-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant. The petitioners in this case are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Gogri (Paura) P.S. Case No.232 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although the petitioners have been named as the members of the mob who had gone to the house of the uncle of the deceased, but in course of investigation no witness has alleged that these petitioners had committed any act much less any overt act and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61446 of 2019(4) dt.24-01-2020 2/3 the general allegation of indiscriminate firing has not been substantiated as only two firearm shots were found on the body of the deceased and those have been specifically attributed to the co-accused Mukesh Yadav and Kishori Yadav as also coaccused Amit Yadav. It is further submitted that so far as these petitioners are concerned, they have been falsely implicated, there is no allegation of either firing or in any way helping the assailants. The father and wife of the assailants have specifically named the co-accused who had fired on the deceased.

Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant have after going through the case diary submitted that in the case diary the persons who have allegedly fired have been named by the father and wife of the deceased as also independent witness, but so far as these petitioners are concerned, nobody has said that they had made any firing.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61446 of 2019(4) dt.24-01-2020 3/3 of occurrence, let the petitioners in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (fifteen thousand ) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Gogri (Paura) P.S. Case No.232 of 2019, corresponding to G.R.No.2000/2019, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. i.e. (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U T