Patna High CourtCR. MISC./7562/2020dismissed

Ram Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2020-03-03Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7562 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-818 Year-2019 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.

RAM KUMAR YADAV Son of Baneshwar Yadav Resident of Village- Bali, Ward No. 2, P.S.- Madhepura (Ghailadh), District- Madhepura. 2.

Kundan Yadav @ Kundan Kumar Son of Suresh Yadav Resident of VillageBali, Ward No. 2, P.S.- Madhepura (Ghailadh), District- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Durgesh Kumar, Advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 03-03-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Madhepura (Ghailadh) P.S. Case No. 818 of 2019 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned C.J.M., Madhepura.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case due to some land dispute.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7562 of 2020(2) dt.03-03-2020 2/2 prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that there are specific allegation of causing assault against these petitioners by deadly weapons.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the materials available on the record wherein there are specific allegation of causing assault against these petitioners by deadly weapons on the vital part on the body of the informant, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is, thus, refused.

In case, petitioners surrender and pray for regular bail in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, their prayer for regular bail shall be considered by the court below on it's own merit without being prejudiced by the orders of this court.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U T