Shiv Narayan Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Hriday Prasad, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binod Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 04-02-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S. Tr. No. 470 of 2021 arising out of Danapur P.S. Case No. 210 of 2017 instituted for the offences under Sections 307, 387, 447, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶15

As per prosecution case, the petitioner along with his associates threatened and attempted to extort Rs. 10 lakh from the Informant demanding to withdraw a murder case filed earlier against the petitioner. When the Informant refused, they attacked and fired upon him but, he was saved.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4391 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2025 2/3

¶18

petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. In the alleged occurrence, no one has sustained injury. The chargesheet has not been filed under the Arms Act. Not a single witness has been cited in the F.I.R. as well as in the case diary. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has altogether nine criminal antecedents as has been stated in Para-3 of the instant bail petition and is languishing in judicial custody since 17.04.2017 without any rhymes or reason. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case under Sections 307, 387, 447, 506 and 506 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. The charge has also been framed against the petitioner on 13.03.2024 under Sections 447/34, 387/34, 307/34 but, till date, no witness has been examined.

¶19

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner, stated that the offence alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature.

¶20

Having heard rival contention of both the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4391 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2025 3/3

¶22

also taking into account the period of custody of the petitioner, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with S. Tr. No. 470 of 2021 arising out of Danapur P.S. Case No. 210 of 2017, subject to the following conditions;

¶23

(i) One of the bailor(s) shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.

¶24

(ii) The petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the court below.

¶25

rishi/-

¶26

U T

¶27

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

Shiv Narayan Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Narayan Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Jha @ Babua Don Vs The State of Bihar

Nand Kishor @ Nand Kishore Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Kumar @ Anil Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Dinesh Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar