Patna High CourtCR. MISC./73461/2022bail granted

Chhotu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2023-04-12Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73461 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2021 Thana- BUNIYAD GANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Chhotu Yadav Son of Shankar Yadav R/o Mohalla- Kurmi Tola, Manpur, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Priya Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 05.07.2022 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 605 of 2022 / 80 of 2022 arising out of Buniyadganj P.S. Case No. 227 of 2021, F.I.R. dated 21.10.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 379, 354, 307, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act. According to prosecution case, the petitioner along with accused persons came to the house of the informant and by using filthy language started assaulting the informant. It is further alleged that the accused persons were armed with weapons, fired which causes injury to the niece of the informant. It is further alleged that they also damaged three

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73461 of 2022(2) dt.12-04-2023 2/3 fridges of the shop of the informant and took Rs. 1.5 lakhs from the counter shop.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that as per the allegation alleged in the F.I.R. is that the petitioner has fired upon Santosh Kumar but the injury report of Santosh Kumar does not support the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. He further submits that similarly situated, co-accused, namely, Shankar Yadav has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.02.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9078 of 2023. The petitioner is in custody since 05.07.2022.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other than the present one but he is on bail in the said case. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, 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 the learned Additional District Judge, XI, Gaya in connection with Sessions Trial No.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73461 of 2022(2) dt.12-04-2023 3/3 605 of 2022 / 80 of 2022 arising out of Buniyadganj P.S. Case No. 227 of 2021, subject to 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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

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.

3. 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) Vanisha/- U T