Yogendra Ram @ Suresh Ram Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2024)

Yogendra Ram @ Suresh Ram Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000 (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Champaran at Bettiah, in connection with Sessions Trial No.118 of 2022, subject to Section 437(3) CrPC conditions and five additional conditions (family-member bailor with bona fide documents; attendance on all trial dates with cancellation after two consecutive unexplained absences; monthly police-station attendance for one year; no inducement of witnesses or tampering with evidence; desistance from further offences).

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner should be granted regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No.118 of 2022, arising out of Lauriya P.S. Case No.148 of 2020 (murder, Section 302/34 IPC).

Court's answer

In the present facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made, the court granted regular bail to the petitioner on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000 (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Champaran at Bettiah, in connection with Sessions Trial No.118 of 2022, subject to the conditions under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and five additional conditions: (i) one bailor to be a family member providing official documents showing bona fide; (ii) appearance on each trial date, failure on two consecutive dates without plausible reason entailing cancellation of bail bonds by the trial court; (iii) monthly appearance before the concerned police station for one year to mark attendance; (iv) no inducement, promise or threat to witnesses or tampering with evidence, failing which the State may seek cancellation; and (v) desistance from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State may seek cancellation.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — regular bail granted (Patna High Court, CR. MISC. No.10888 of 2024, oral order dt.22-02-2024, Dr. Anshuman, J.). Petitioner Yogendra Ram @ Suresh Ram sought bail in Sessions Trial No.118 of 2022 arising out of Lauriya P.S. Case No.148 of 2020 (lodged 21.09.2020, Section 302/34 IPC), in which the informant's daughter was allegedly found hung in a mango orchard and the FIR-named accused, including the petitioner, were suspected of her murder. Charge had been framed and prosecution evidence commenced; petitioner in custody since 14.02.2023 with no criminal antecedent. Court granted bail on bonds of Rs.30,000 with two like sureties to Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Champaran at Bettiah, subject to Section 437(3) CrPC conditions plus five additional conditions (family-member bailor with bona fide proof; attendance at every trial date with bond-cancellation on two consecutive unexplained absences; monthly police-station reporting for one year; no inducement/tampering with witnesses or evidence; no fresh offences).

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10888 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2020 Thana- LAURIA District- West Champaran

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

Yogendra Ram @ Suresh Ram Son of Sri Mukhi Ram R/o vill - Sitapur, P.s. - Lauriya, Distt. - West Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

2 22-02-2024

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No.118 of 2022, arising out of Lauriya P.S. Case No.148 of 2020, lodged on 21.09.2020, under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution, the informant alleged that on 20.09.2020, his daughter went to attend the nature’s call but did not return. Thereafter, the informant came to know that her daughter was hung in the orchard of mango towards west side of the village. The informant raised suspicion against the FIR named accused persons including the petitioner that they committed murder of his daughter.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10888 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 2/3

petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that the offence has been caused by the informant side himself and name of the entire family has been involved in the present case. Counsel submits that charge has already been framed and evidence of prosecution witness has started and no purpose shall be solved keeping the petitioner in custody, particularly when the case is based on suspicion. The petitioner is in custody since 14.02.2023 having no criminal antecedent.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer

for bail.

In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, let the petitioner, above named, be granted bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/(Rupees Thirty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Champaran at Bettiah, in connection with Sessions Trial No.118 of 2022, arising out of Lauriya P.S. Case No.148 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with other following conditions:

(i) One of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10888 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 3/3

bona fide;

(ii) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bonds by the trial court itself;

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every month for one year to mark attendance;

(iv) The petitioner 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 the bail bonds; and

(v) The petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the state shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.

(Dr. Anshuman, J)

Mkr./-

U T