✦ Patna High Court

Rahul Yadav @ Rahul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 67043 of 2023RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD3 min read

Case at a glance

Bench
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD

Outcome

Allowed

This application stands allowed

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 99. This application stands allowed. Rishi/- U T (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

Judgment

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate Mr. Atul Chandra, APP 2 07-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner in the present case is seeking pre- arrest bail in connection with Akbarpur P.S. Case No. 337 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. He has got two criminal antecedent.

3.

As per the prosecution story, on 09.07.2022, while the informant was returning from coaching, all the accused persons stopped his toto and assaulted him. It is alleged that on

13.07.2022, the accused persons variously armed came near the house of the informant and exploded bombs.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67043 of 2023(2) dt.07-11-2023 case. It is submitted that nine persons have been made accused in the present occurrence in which the informant is alleged to have been beaten. There is no specific allegation against this petitioner. It is further submitted that the other co-accused have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by different co- ordinate Benches of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 68704 of 2022 and Cr. Misc. No. 4576 of 2023.

5.

Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case wherein it is submitted that this petitioner is named one amongst the nine accused persons who had allegedly beaten the informant after his abduction, however, the informant was left and further considering the informant did not lodge any F.I.R. with respect to the occurrence dated 9th July, 2022 and as regards occurrence of 13th July, 2022, this petitioner has not been named in the F.I.R., there being no specific allegation against the petitioner of commission of any overt act, further other co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail in Cr. Misc. No. 68704 of 2022 and Cr. Misc. No. 4576 of 2023, this Court directs that in case of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, the petitioner above named be Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67043 of 2023(2) dt.07-11-2023 released on bail in connection with Akbarpur P.S. Case No. 337 of 2022 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-1st, Nawada subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7.

Further condition that the petitioner shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer of the case within a period of two weeks from today and shall cooperate in course of investigation.

8.

And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

Operative part

9.

This application stands allowed. Rishi/- U T (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: This application stands allowed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 147, 149, 323, 504, 506; Explosive Substances Act, 1908 — ss. 3, 4, 5; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2).

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Patna High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 67043 of 2023). ← Search more judgments