Devan Yadav @ Degan Yadav @ Ramji @ Ramji Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11848 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2022 Thana- CHANAN District- Lakhisarai

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

Devan Yadav @ Degan Yadav @ Ramji @ Ramji Yadav Son of Basudev Yadav Resident of Village- Mahulia, P.S.- Chanan, District- Lakhisarai

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

==============	... ... Opposite Party/s ========================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s	: Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State ==============	: Mr.Amitesh Kumar, APP ========================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 01-03-2024

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chanan P.S. Case No. 13 of 2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 364(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code; Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 18 and 20 of the UAP Act.

¶14

The following order was passed on 19.10.2023 in

¶15

Cr. Misc. No. 68486 of 2023:

¶16

“Heard Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Navin Kumar Pandey, learned APP for the State.

¶17

2. This application for grant of regular bail arises out of Chanan P.S. Case No.13 of 2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 364-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶18

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with 30-40 accused persons, who are naxals, have kidnapped Ramji Yadav and his son Dharmvir Kumar @

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11848 of 2024(2) dt.01-03-2024 2/2

¶20

Kumkum for extortion. Subsequently, the said persons were recovered.

¶21

4. It appears that the petitioner is involved in Naxal activities and is being prosecuted under the U.A.P. Act also. The petitioner is in custody since 13.07.2023.

¶22

5. Considering the seriousness of allegation levelled against the petitioner and also the fact that kidnapping for ransom is punishable with capital punishment, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail. This application is, accordingly, rejected.

¶23

6. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of all the accused persons of this case including this petitioner.

¶24

7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the District Judge, Lakhisarai forthwith through FAX or e-mail for its compliance.”

¶25

The prayer for bail of the petitioner has been renewed again.

¶26

I see no reason to review my earlier bail order and also in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gurwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab and Another reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 109 .

¶27

Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.

¶28

The Court below is directed to expedite the trial.

¶29

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶30

P. Kumar

¶31

U T

Devan Yadav @ Degan Yadav @ Ramji @ Ramji Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devan Yadav @ Degan Yadav @ Ramji @ Ramji Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raja Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Sarfaraj @ Patar Vs The State of Bihar

Mithilesh Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Prakash Yadav @ Prakash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar