Jatan Yadav @ Ram Jatan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14637 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2016 Thana- KONCH District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

JATAN YADAV @ RAM JATAN YADAV Son of Late Sukhu Yadav Resident of Village - Ker, P.S.- Konch, District - Gaya. 2.

Keshar Yadav Son of Jatan Yadav @ Ram Jatan Yadav Resident of Village - Ker, P.S.- Konch, District - Gaya.

3.

Dhananjay Yadav Son of Jatan Yadav @ Ram Jatan Yadav Resident of Village - Ker, P.S.- Konch, District - Gaya.

4.

Shambhu Yadav Son of Keshar Yadav Resident of Village - Ker, P.S.- Konch, District - Gaya.

5.

Satendra Yadav @ Satendra Kumar @ Satyendra Kumar Son of Keshar Yadav Resident of Village - Ker, P.S.- Konch, District - Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Deepak Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nityanand Ms. Anita Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 03-07-2020 The present petition has been taken up for consideration through the mode of Video conferencing in view of the prevailing situation on account of COVID 19 Pandemic, requiring social distancing.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Anita Kumari Singh, the learned APP appearing for the State.

This is an application for grant of anticipatory

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14637 of 2020(2) dt.03-07-2020 2/3 bail in connection with Konch P.S. Case No. 120 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accused persons including the petitioners herein are alleged to have intercepted the informant, while he was going to plough his field on a tractor on 21.7.2016 at about 5:00 PM. and thereafter, they had assaulted the informant. The learned counsel for petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent, they have been falsely implicated in the present case and they are having a clean antecedent. It is further submitted that a general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the petitioners, hence, they are liable to be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Per contra, the learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and taking

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14637 of 2020(2) dt.03-07-2020 3/3 into account the fact that a general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against them, I deem it fit and proper to admit the petitioners to the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.-1st Class, Gaya in connection with Konch P.S.Case No. 120 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U T