Allowed

Rajnish Kumar Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Apr 2022CR. MISC./52289/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application arising from an FIR under various sections of the IPC, this court directed the release of the petitioner on bail subject to the execution of a bond with sureties and compliance with standard conditions including the unavailability of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount, subject to specific conditions.

Rajnish Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52289 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2021 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura

¶3

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

¶4

RAJNISH KUMAR YADAV S/o Ravindra Yadav Resident of VillagePakilapar, P.S.- Murliganj, Dist- Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta, APP ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 18-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

The Murliganj P.S. Case No. 02 of 2021 was lodged on^1st of January, 2021 under Sections 341, 323, 307, 324, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

As per the prosecution story, the informant, Sanjiv Kumar gave a written application before the Murliganj, SHO alleging that the petitioner herein along with accused persons came near the Middle School and due to previous enmity started abusing them. Upon being opposed, it is alleged that co-accused Dipak Kumar assaulted his brother Chandan Kumar by axe causing injury on the head. Meanwhile co-accused Ravindra Yadav, gave iron rod blow to the informant’s head causing injury to him. The further allegation against the accused persons is that they jointly assaulted both of them. It is lastly stated in the FIR that the gold chain worth Rs. 60 thousand was snatched

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52289 of 2021(3) dt.18-04-2022 2/3

¶14

by Ravindra Yadav that led to the lodging of the First Information Report.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that specific allegations have been made attributing the role to Dipak Kumar & Ravindra Yadav, who caused injury on the head of his brother Chandan Kumar and the informant respectively. So far as this petitioner is concerned, it is submitted that there is an omnibus allegation against him and in view of the fact that charge sheet has already been submitted and he is in jail since 28^th of January, 2021, (as stated in para-16 of the bail application), he deserves bail.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner has provided a copy of the order dated 06.04.2022 in Cr. Misc. No. 53400 of 2021 (Sujen Yadav @ Sajen Yadav @ Surendra Yadav Vs. The State of Bihar) by which privilege of bail has been granted to the petitioner by this Court.

¶17

Let a copy of the order be kept on record.

¶18

Taking into account the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000 (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate -2nd, Madhepura in

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52289 of 2021(3) dt.18-04-2022 3/3

¶20

connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 02 of 2021.

¶21

However taking into account that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent, the following conditions are imposed :-

¶22

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioner, who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

¶23

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the State and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reasons will entail his cancellation of bail by the Trial Court itself;

¶24

(iii) he shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidence, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds;

¶25

(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

¶26

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶27

Jagdish/-

¶28

U T

Rajnish Kumar Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajnish Kumar Yadav 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tanveer Alam @ Md. Tanveer Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Mantu Kumar @ Mantu Sahani @ Mantu Kumar Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Nisharalam @ Nishar Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Dili Ram @ Dilip Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar