Lalu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Nirmala Kumari, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 17-02-2025

¶13

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

¶14

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 768 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 310(4), 310(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 & 35 of the Arms Act.

¶15

3. Prosecution case in short is that police on a tip off regarding assembly on anti-social elements conducted raid and apprehended accused persons, including the petitioner and on search, there is recovery of two live cartridges from the possession of the petitioner, whereas a country made pistol along with two live cartridges have been recovered from coaccused, namely, Ankit Kumar.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7691 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2025 2/3

¶17

4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 03-12-2024. Petitioner bears one criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

¶18

5. It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. There has no concern with the recovered arms. Learned counsel goes on to submit that recovery is planted and petitioner has been implicated in this case on extraneous consideration. There is no compliance of Section 103 of the BNSS, 2023.

¶19

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶20

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody of the petitioner and manner of petitioner’s implication, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶21

8. Let the petitioner 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 Amarpur P.S. Case No. 768 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7691 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2025 3/3

¶23

(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the

¶24

family of the petitioner.

¶25

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

¶26

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶27

Raj Kishore/- U T

Lalu Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalu 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

Harendra Mahto @ Harindra Mahato Vs The State of Bihar

Altumas @ Jaid Ali@Alatamas Vs The State of Bihar

Samir Faruque Vs The State of Bihar

Company Yadav @ Kampani Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sholu Kumar @ Solu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bindauli Ravidas @ Bindoli Ravidas @ Bedauli Das Vs The State of Bihar