Vimlesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2606 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-294 Year-2024 Thana- GOH District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Vimlesh Yadav S/O Ramsinghasan Yadav @ Sinhasan Singh R/O vill - Khajanti Bigha, P.S- Deokund, Dist.- Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Harendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Umesh Lal Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 08-05-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Goh P.S. Case No. 294 of 2024, registered under Sections 317 (2) and 336(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Prosecution story is that on the basis of secret information that a person was waiting near Deohara chowk bridge to take delivery of a stolen motorcycle. On this basis of this information, the informant-raiding party along with team and Chowkidar, Nathu Paswan reached the spot. Th suspect identified as Ravi Ranjan Kumar and was found trying to start a motorcycle. Upon inquiry, the accused failed to produce any ownership documents and claimed the motrycle was purchased by his elder brother, Ranjit Kumar from Vimlesh Yadav
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2606 of 2025(3) dt.08-05-2025 2/3 (petitioner).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner further submits that he has been named in the F.I.R. on the basis of statement made by coaccused, Ravi Ranjan. Recovery of the alleged stolen motorcycle is not from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner further submits that the search and seizure memo has not been witnessed by two independent witnesses which puts a serious question mark on the legality and validity of the seizure itself. The petitioner is clean antecedent.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and the fact that the name of the petitioner came on the basis of statement made by co-accused and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, this Court is inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, named above, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2606 of 2025(3) dt.08-05-2025 3/3 each amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Daudnagar, Aurangabad, in connection with Goh P.S. Case No. 294 of 2024, subject to the condition laid down under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) sanjeev/- U T