Allowed

Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Oct 2022CR. APP (SJ)/1094/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed an appeal against a bail rejection order. The court set aside the lower court's order, noting the appellant was not named in the FIR, lacked incriminating evidence except for a co-accused's statement, and co-accused had already been granted bail. Directed the trial court to grant bail. Directed the trial court to grant bail on specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dismissing bail prayer set aside; appellant enlarged on bail Rs. 25,000 with two sureties on conditions of cooperation, presence, and non-tampering.

Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Corruption | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1094 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2020 Thana- CHANDI District- Nalanda

¶3

======================================================

¶4

GUDDU YADAV @ GUDDU KUMAR Son of Karu Yadav Resident of Village - Rupaspur, Police Station - Chiksaura (Karai Parsurai), District - Nalanda.

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR

¶8

Hiraman manjhi Son of Late Raghu Manjhi Resident of Village - Bhagwanpur, Police Station- Chandi, District - Nalanda.

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT

¶12

Date : 20-10-2022

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Special

¶14

Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

The appellant has filed the instant appeal against the order dated 22.02.2022 passed by the learned 3^rd Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge SC/ST, Nalanda at Biharsharif whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant in G.R. No. 834/2020 arising out of Chandi P.S. Case No. 57 of 2020 registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act Section 3 (i) (r) of the SC/ST Act was rejected.

¶16

As per prosecution case, an unknown thief fired which hit the informant’s son due to which he died during treatment.

¶17

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant is in custody since 28.01.2021 and bears four criminal

¶18

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1094 of 2022 dt.20-10-2022 2/3

¶19

antecedents. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant is not named in FIR. There is no eye witness of the alleged occurrence. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the appellant. Upon the confessional statement of the co-accused namely Vikash Kumar and Balgovind Kumar, name of the present appellant has been surfaced in this case. Except the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is nothing on record to demonstrate the complicity of the present appellant with the alleged occurrence. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. Similarly situated, co-accused Abhishek Kumar @ Abhishek Kumar Gope and Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Yadav have already been granted bail vide Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos. 1993 of 2021 and 1332 of 2021.

¶20

Learned Spl. P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the appellant.

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, appellant is not named in the FIR, charge sheet has been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence, materials available on record, impugned order dated 22.02.2022 is hereby set aside and present appeal stands allowed.

¶22

The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with G.R. No. 834/2020 arising out of Chandi P.S. Case No. 57 of 2020 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/ (Rupees

¶23

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1094 of 2022 dt.20-10-2022 3/3

¶24

Twenty Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the 3^rd learned Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge, SC/ST, Nalanda at Biharsharif, subject to following conditions:-

¶25

(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

¶26

(ii) Appellant will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶27

(iii) If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶28

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶29

alok/-

¶30

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	N/A
Uploading Date	22.10.2022
Transmission Date	22.10.2022

Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishal Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Amar Kumar @ Amma Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Ramadhir Kumar @ Randhir Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Gautam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sudhir Kumar Vs The State of Bihar