Bhushan Yadav @ Kiran Bhushan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81602 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2024 Thana- KIUL District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== 1.
Bhushan Yadav @ Kiran Bhushan Yadav Son of Mushhru Yadav R/o - Singhchak, P.S - Kiul, District - Lakhisarai 2.
Seepak Kumar Son of Bhushan Yadav @ Kiran Bhushan Yadav R/o - Singhchak, P.S - Kiul, District - Lakhisarai 3.
Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Yadav Son of Bhushan Yadav @ Kiran Bhushan Yadav R/o - Singhchak, P.S - Kiul, District - Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-12-2024 Heard Ld. counsel for the petitioners and Ld. APP for the State.
2. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, apprehending their arrest, in connection with Kiul P.S. Case No. 50 of 2024, dated 10.06.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 354(B), 379, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the allegation, the petitioners along with other co-accused have surrounded the informant and snatched her golden chain as well as misbehaved with her.
4. Ld. counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81602 of 2024(2) dt.04-12-2024 2/3 Petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits petitioners are father and two sons and it is a common knowledge that any son in front of his father will not misbehave with a lady. Allegation of snatching golden chain is also superficial. He further submits that on account of political differences in mukhiya elections, the petitioners have been falsely implicated.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioners have not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.
6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail petition that the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 have one criminal antecedent, whereas petitioner no. 2 has no criminal antecedent.
7. Ld. APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioners for bail.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this petition is allowed, directing the petitioners above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81602 of 2024(2) dt.04-12-2024 3/3 satisfaction of Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai, in connection with Kiul P.S. Case No. 50 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. and on the following conditions:
(i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, Ld. court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners after hearing them and getting satisfied that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents despite their knowledge of the same.
(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, Ld. court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners. (Jitendra Kumar, J) shoaib/- U