Bindeshwari Dav @ Bindeshwari Yadav @ Vindeshwari Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10045 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-271 Year-2021 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.
BINDESHWARI DAV @ BINDESHWARI YADAV @ VINDESHWARI YADAV Son of Late Surji Prasad Yadav Resident of Village - Parwa Santnagar, Ward no.07-13, P.s.- Murliganj, Distt.- Madhepura. 2.
RAHUL KUMAR @ RAHUL KUMAR YADAV @ RAHUL YADAV Son of Bindeshwari Dav @ Bindeshwari Yadav @ Vindeshwari Yadav Resident of Village - Parwa Santnagar, Ward no.07-13, P.s.- Murliganj, Distt.- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Uday Pratap Singh For the Informant Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 23-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case no. 271 of 2021 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 448, 341, 323, 324, 307, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per allegation in the FIR, due to previous enmity, all FIR named accused persons entered into the house of the informant and on the order of petitioner no. 1, accused persons started to assault him by fists and knife as a result of which he sustained injuries.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10045 of 2022(2) dt.23-08-2022 2/2 has submitted that petitioners are is innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. Informant's husband has received one grievous injury in his face, which is attributed to Ashok Kumar Yadav and not against the petitioners. Petitioner no. 1 is said to be order giver while petitioner no. 2 has assaulted on his chest, but as per injury report, informant has not sustained any injury in his chest.
Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of Bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case no. 271 of 2021, they will be enlarged on 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 ACJM-II, Madhepura subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U