Tejashvi Raj @ Tejashvi Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71879 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2024 Thana- PIPRA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Tejashvi Raj @ Tejashvi Yadav Son of Prem Chand Yadav Resident of Village - Jamuniya (Khairimal), P.S.- Pipra, District - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhiraj Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is an application for regular bail on behalf of the petitioner for the offences alleged under Sections 399, 402, 413 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, registered in connection with Pipra P.S. Case No. 144 of 2024.

3. As per prosecution case, the informant got secret information that some miscreants are assembled with illegal weapons for committing offence, thereafter, the police party reached at that place, apprehended some persons and on search, there has been recovery of one country-made pistol and live cartridge from co-accused persons.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71879 of 2024(2) dt.08-10-2024 2/2

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has committed no offence. Petitioner was not apprehended on spot and he has no concern with the alleged occurrence. The name of the petitioner has come into light on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person, which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and he is in custody since 13.08.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer of bail.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above-named, 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 S.D.J.M., Sadar Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Pipra P.S. Case No. 144 of 2024, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall co-operate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the Court. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Arish/- U T