Ritesh Yadav Alias Ritesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4669 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2023 Thana- LAUKAHA District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

Ritesh Yadav Alias Ritesh Kumar Son of Pawan Yadav Alias Pawan Kumar Yadav Resident of village- Sahorwa, P.S.- Laukaha, Distt- Madhubani 2.

Sajjan Yadav Alias Sajjan Kumar Son of Amar Yadav Alias Amar Kumar Yadav Resident of village- Sahorwa, P.S.- Laukaha, Distt- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jay Ram Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State along with learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No.83/2023, dated 01.04.2023 G.R. Case No. 582/2023, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302, 120(B) and 504 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Jhanjharpur, Madhubani.

3. Learned counsel for the informant submits that on account of dispute relating to land in between the petitioner and Raushan Kumar Yadav and others, there was an altercation in between the side of the petitioners and Raushan Kumar Yadav

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4669 of 2024(2) dt.19-02-2024 2/2 and his side and when altercation turned into a fight, informant being neighbour along with his family members intervened in order to get the matter settled but the petitioners started assaulting the informant and his side and on account of assault, three persons from the side of the informant were killed, when absolutely they had no concern with the dispute in between the petitioners and Raushan Kumar Yadav and others.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners is not able to rebut the submission of the learned counsel for the informant that three persons from the side of the informant died who had absolutely no concern with the dispute in between the petitioners and Raushan Kumar Yadav and others, who are related and were having dispute relating to land.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P. No.2, the Court is not inclined to entertain the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners.

6. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioners stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T