Chandan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1816 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2020 Thana- NAUHATTA District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
Chandan Yadav Son Of Rama Avtar Yadav R/O Village- Kubba, P.SNavhatta, Dist- Rohtas 2.
Satish Yadav Son Of Rama Avtar Yadav R/O Village- Kubba, P.S- Navhatta, Dist- Rohtas 3.
Sita Ram Yadav Not Known R/O Village- Kubba, P.S- Navhatta, DistRohtas 4.
Ram Avtar Yadav Son Of Late Ram Kewal Yadav R/O Village- Kubba, P.SNavhatta, Dist- Rohtas 5.
Manoj Yadav Son Of Late Ram Kewal Yadav R/O Village- Kubba, P.SNavhatta, Dist- Rohtas ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1- Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sadanand Paswan- S.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-07-2021 Heard Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh-1, the learned Advocate for the appellants and Mr. Sadanand Paswan, the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State. The appellants have challenged the order dated 10.11.2020 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-1st, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Navhatta P. S. Case No.51 of 2020, instituted for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 325, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the Scheduled
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1816 of 2021(2) dt.15-07-2021 2/3 Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.
From the F.I.R., it appears that there was some dispute between the parties with respect to tending of cows and damage of the seeds in the field. As a protest, the appellants are said to have taken away the father of the informant in jungle and assaulted him.
The learned Advocate for the appellants has submitted that the occurrence arose out of a small dispute and there is a counter-version of the occurrence as well. The accusation with respect to demeaning the members of the prosecution party is absolutely wrong and distorted.
Considering the afore-noted facts, the order dated 10.11.2020, referred to above, is set-aside.
The appeal stands allowed.
The appellants, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of eight weeks, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1816 of 2021(2) dt.15-07-2021 3/3 the satisfaction of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge1st, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Navhatta P. S. Case No.51 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J) vikash/- U T