High CourtsSingle Bench

Bijendra Singh @ Bijendra Yadav vs State Of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 25 January 2021 · Citation: (2021) 01 PAT CK 0214

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 325, 341 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 27 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 28086 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

25 paragraphs · 517 words
1.

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2.

Heard Mr. Lal Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Anita Kumari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred

to as the ‘APP’) for the State.

3.

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Jamhore PS Case No. 35 of 2019 dated 01.04.2019 (G.R. No. 564 of 2019), instituted under

Sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 341/ 323/ 325/ 307/ 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

4.

The allegation against the petitioner is of assault on the family members of the informant and also of firing on one person by co-accused Binda

Yadav resulting in his death.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and the direct allegation of firing is

against another co-accused. Learned counsel submitted that upon investigation, it transpired that the petitioner was not even present at the place of

occurrence due to which the police had submitted final form against him not sending up for trial, but the Court below differing from the same, has

taken cognizance against the petitioner also. Learned counsel submitted that there is only one other case against the petitioner, that too, of the year

2002 and after that he has not been made accused in any other case.

6.

Learned APP submitted that there is allegation against the petitioner also of assault and other family members of the informant have also been

injured. However, she could not controvert that the police has found substance in the defence of the petitioner that he was not even present at the

scene of occurrence and, thus, had not sent him up for trial.

7.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five

thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Aurangabad in Jamhore PS Case No. 35 of 2019,

subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and further (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close

relative of the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner and the bailors shall execute bond with regard to good behaviour of the petitioner, and (iii) that the

petitioner shall also give an undertaking to the Court that he shall not indulge in any illegal/criminal activity, act in violation of any law/statutory

provisions, tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking shall lead to

cancellation of his bail bonds. The petitioner shall cooperate in the case and be present before the Court on each and every date. Failure to cooperate

or being absent on two consecutive dates, without sufficient cause, shall also lead to cancellation of his bail bonds.

8.

The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.