Yogal Yadav @ Jugesh Kumar @ Jugesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8041 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2024 Thana- INDUSTRIAL District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1.

Yogal Yadav @ Jugesh Kumar @ Jugesh Yadav S/O Kail Yadav Resident of Village - Yadav Tola (Fetehpur), Police Station- Industrial, Dist- Bhagalpur 2.

Kattu Kumar @ Ramu Kumar S/O Pali Yadav Resident of Village - Yadav Tola (Fetehpur), Police Station- Industrial, Dist- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Pushpa Sinha-1, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-03-2025

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

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 337, 307, 379 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on account of previous dispute with Kattu Kumar, the accused persons including the petitioners came and assaulted the informant and his family members. Further, Kattu assaulted the informant by an iron rod causing injury on head thereafter Golu Kumar assaulted the informant by lathi while Tenti Yadav and Anju Devi assaulted by brick.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8041 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 2/2 petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the order impugned, it would manifest that the injury suffered by the injured is simple in nature. It is next submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then the blow was not repeated and the petitioners are not the criminal.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Industrial P.S. Case No. 115 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T