High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Budhu Yadav &Amp; Ors vs State Of Bihar on 14 June, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Budhu Yadav &Amp; Ors vs State Of Bihar on 14 June, 2010
          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                      Cr.Misc. No.19971 of 2010
                  1. BUDHU YADAV @ Budhu Mahto.
            2. Kewal Yadav @ Kewal Yadav @ Kewal Mahto.
            Both are sons of Late Jalo Yadav @ Jalo Mahto.
                 3. Samar Yadav, S/o Sri Jagu Yadav.
                                Versus
                         THE STATE OF BIHAR
                               -----------

02. 14.06.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

the State.

The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in a

case instituted for the offences under Sections

436/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It has been submitted that there is land

dispute between the parties for which a Title Suit is

pending between them. The submission is that there

is no eye-witness to the occurrence and the

petitioners have been implicated only on suspicion.

In view of such, in the event of surrender of

the petitioners, named above, within four weeks from

today in connection with Simultalla P.S. Case No. 09

of 2010, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on

furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Five Thousand)

each with two sureties of the like amount each to the

satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui

subject to conditions as laid down under Section
2

438(2) Cr.P.C. and (i) That one of the bailors will be a

close relative of the petitioners who will give an

affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with

the petitioners. The bailor will also undertake to

inform the Court if there is any change in the address

of the petitioners. (ii) That the petitioners shall

undertake to be represented on the first date after

cognizance and in case they fail to do so, their bail

bond will be liable to be cancelled (iii) That the

petitioners will give an undertaking that they will

receive the police papers on the given date and be

present on date fixed for charge and if they fail to do

so on two given dates and delays the trial in any

manner, their bail will be liable to be cancelled for

reasons of misuse. (iv) That the petitioners will be well

represented on each date and if they fail to do so on

two consecutive dates, their bail will be liable to be

cancelled.

(Anjana Prakash, J.)
Vikash/-