Allowed

Pramod Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Jan 2024CR. MISC./84387/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought regular bail in a case involving charges under IPC sections 302, 307, and Arms Act. Although not named in the FIR, he was added during investigation. The court granted bail with strict conditions regarding appearance and witness tampering.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with bail bonds of Rs.30,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 437(3) CrPC and specific terms regarding attendance and conduct.

Pramod Yadav Vs the State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84387 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2023 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger

¶3

====================================================== Pramod Yadav Son Of Sindho Yadav R/O Vill - Shankarpur Milki, P.S. - Muffasil, Distt. - Munger

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jyoti Ranjan Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 10-01-2024

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶11

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.132 of 2023, lodged on 13.04.2023, under Sections 147/148/149/385/324/326/307/302/504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶12

As per the prosecution, in the FIR there were 9 persons made accused excluding the petitioner. As per the allegation the demand of ransom is there in the FIR and allegation of firing is also there but those allegations are against the named accused Bhisma Kumar and Sanni Yadav.

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84387 of 2023(2) dt.10-01-2024 2/4

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that name of the petitioner has not figured in the FIR rather his name has inserted by the police during investigation at the mouth of injured Chandan Yadav who has stated in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. six days after the date of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR is very clear in which the name of the petitioner is not there; rather his son’s name is there. The petitioner is in custody since 31.08.2023 having no criminal antecedent. He also submits that three named accused persons have been granted bail in two cases by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.09.2023 and 02.11.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos.61684 and 59913 of 2023 respectively.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer

¶16

for bail.

¶17

Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that it is true that name of the petitioner is not in the FIR rather it surfaced on the basis of statement made by the injured person under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Counsel also submits that in paragraph-59 of the case-diary it has come that there are 13 empty cartridges were recovered and it is possible only when the firing used to take place from

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84387 of 2023(2) dt.10-01-2024 3/4

¶19

different angles.

¶20

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 learned A.C.J.M.-II, Munger, in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.132 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with other following conditions:

¶21

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

¶22

(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;

¶23

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

¶24

(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

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84387 of 2023(2) dt.10-01-2024 4/4

¶26

(v) The petitioner shall desist from committing any

¶27

criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty

¶28

to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.

¶29

(Dr. Anshuman, J)

¶30

Mkr./-

¶31

U T

Pramod Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binod Prajapati Vs The Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. and Ors.

Bishnukant Thakur Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Brajendra Kumar Dwivedi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Krishna Kumar Mahra Vs The State of Bihar

Nadim Khan Vs The State of Bihar

Dilip Rai Vs the State of Bihar