Ram Prakash Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5625 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2024 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani ====================================================== Ram Prakash Yadav S/o- Hareram yadav Village- Brahampur PO-Brahampur PS- Phulparas Distt- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shivnandan Bharti For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Phulparas P.S. Case No.14 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 385, 379, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and Section 27 of Arms Act, 1959
3. As per prosecution case, petitioner and others armed with weapon is said to have abused and demanded Rs. 5,00,00/- from the informant. It is alleged that one of the accused person is said to have fired and informant made escape from the said firing by kneeling down his head. It is alleged that, Sandhya Kumar, who is aged 7 years sustained injury in eye and Sakshi Kumari sustained injury in leg.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5625 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent. Petitioner has raised voice against the irregularity in the functioning of PACS and on account of said reason he has falsely been implicated in the case. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner rather allegation is quite vague. Demand of ransom is totally without any basis. He further submits that occurrence took place on 12.01.2024, FIR was registered on the same day but it was forwarded to the learned trial court on 20.01.2024 after inordinate delay of 8 days and no plausible explanation was given for the same. Learned counsel orally submits that injury received by the injured are simple in nature.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5625 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025 3/3 released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M-II, Jhanjharpur in connection with Phulparas P.S. Case No.14 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) vashudha/- U T