Shravan Yadav @ Sharvan Kumar @ Sharvan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12300 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2006 Thana- SHEIKHOPUR SARAI DistrictSheikhpura ====================================================== Shravan Yadav @ Sharvan Kumar @ Sharvan Yadav Son of Brahamdeo Yadav Resident of Village - Bhadeli, P.S. and District - Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 13-05-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sheikhopur Sarai P.S. Case No. 25 of 2006 for the offence registered under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120B of IPC and 27 of Arms Act lodged on 23.09.2006 by the informant,Ramdeo Prasad.

3. As per the prosecution story, the matter is of the year 2006, the informant alleged that he had gone for treatment of some patient at Bahikatta and in the process, has moved to Mushartoli. He saw his younger brother, Narendra Kumar returning and when he reached near a partly constructed house, the accused persons resorted to indiscriminate firing on the order of Brahamdeo Yadav. It hit him, he was found lying in the paddy field who later died, which followed the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12300 of 2025(3) dt.13-05-2025 2/2 though unfortunate killing took place, each and every family member have been implicated/roped in, the petitioner included who is serving in the CRPF.

5. Learned APP, Mr. Bharat Bhushan opposes the prayer submitting that the matter is of the year 2016, even taking into account his ignorance, he filed anticipatory bail in the year 2021 before the learned Sessions Judge, Sheikhpura which came to be rejected on 05.04.2021. Still, he took four years to come before this Court.

6. Taking into account the aforesaid facts including that the case has been lodged under Section 302 of the IPC in which the petitioner is one of the named accused, it would be appropriate that he seek bail.

7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

8. If the petitioner surrenders within a period of four weeks, the Court concerned shall take up the matter and dispose it of preferably on the same day.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U