Lalo Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73963 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2025 Thana- SARMERA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Lalo Yadav, aged about 26 years, Gender-Male, S/o Shravan Yadav @ Muso Yadav R/o Village - Chero, P.S - Sarmera, District - Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satya Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sarmera P.S. Case No. 111 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 352, 351(2), 324(5), 326(g), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, on 11.05.2025 at about 02:30 in the night the petitioner, co-accused Guddu Yadav and three other persons of the same village set fire to the Gumati of

2/4 the informant due to which the Gumati was burnt to ashes. When the informant's brother Vicky Ram came to know about it at night, he found petitioner and co-accused Guddu Yadav standing there and co-accused Guddu Yadav was holding a pistol in his hand. On 09.05.2025, both the above mentioned persons together took the informant down from the Gumati and assaulted him due to which both his hands and legs were broken and informant was threatened to burn the shop.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after lodging F.I.R., the Investigating Officer (I.O.) verified the alleged Gumati but found no sign of burn nor any cartridge recovered from there. In this case the story which initiated on the burning of Gumati is totally falsified and petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. According to the F.I.R., the alleged Gumati of the informant was burnt in night and on the next day the F.I.R. lodged i.e. on 09.05.2025 which also questions the authenticity of F.I.R. The petitioner having four criminal antecedents in which he is already on bail. He further submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. It has been orally submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to

3/4 prove his innocence.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that name of petitioner finds place in the FIR and hence, he cannot escape from the allegation made in the prosecution story.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Sarmera P.S. Case No. 111 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.

7. The application stands allowed.

8. However, it is made clear that if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner despite giving assurance to this Court is not co-operating in the investigation,

4/4 in that event, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) Nilmani/- U T