Golu Yadav And Anr vs State Of Bihar

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

Heard Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Nautan PS Case No. 475 of 2019 dated 14.12.2019, instituted under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 302, 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioners and others is of assault on the head of the husband of the informant and specifically against petitioner no. 1 that he gave farsa blow on the head.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that though the allegation is specific of having inflicted farsa blow on the head of the husband of the informant, but the postmortem report shows only lacerated wound on the head though the skull was broken and haematoma was inside. It was submitted that the same falsifies the allegation and the report shows that the same was caused by hard and blunt substance, whereas, farsa is a sharp edge weapon. It was submitted that against petitioner no. 2, there is no allegation of any overt act and, at best, he was only the member of the mob. It was submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP submitted that there is specific and direct allegation of assault on the head against the petitioner no. 1 and that is the cause of death. There was haematoma found and also brain tissues were damaged and there was fracture of the skill also and further, farsa has two edges; one sharp and one blunt and, thus, general reference of assault by farsa cannot be said to be false in view of the postmortem report opining that it was caused by hard and blunt substance as the allegation of assault is directly against petitioner no. 1 of causing grievous injury leading to death. However, with regard to petitioner no. 2, it was not controverted that there was overt act alleged against him.

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 no. 2, Mogal Yadav @ Mugal Yadav, 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, in Nautan PS Case No. 475 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.

It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioner, to the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

The prayer for pre-arrest bail of petitioner no.1, Golu Yadav, stands rejected.

The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.