Pramod Yadav @ Pramod Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73911 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-619 Year-2024 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Pramod Yadav @ Pramod Prasad Son of Mahendra Yadav @ Mahendra Prasad R/o- Pakri, P.S.- Masaurhi, Distt. -Patna, Bihar 2.
Raviranjan Yadav @ Raviranjan Prasad Son of Mahendra Yadav @ Mahendra Prasad R/o- Pakri, P.S.- Masaurhi, Distt. -Patna, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Anant Kumar 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-01-2025 Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Anand Kumar 1, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 619 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 22.07.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115, 109 and 352 of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other co-accused person have assaulted to the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73911 of 2024(3) dt.29-01-2025 2/3 allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that due to delay in paddy plantation the present occurrence has taken place. He further submits that although there is allegation against the petitioner that he along with other co-accused person has assaulted to the informant. He further submits that although the informant has received the injury but injury report of the informant suggests that the injury is found simple in nature.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts that the petitioners have clean antecedent and injury inflicted upon the informant is simple in nature, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M., Masaurhi in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 619 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73911 of 2024(3) dt.29-01-2025 3/3 down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioners 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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioners. 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) ajay/- U T