Lalan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12429 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2024 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna ====================================================== Lalan Yadav S/o Nageena Yadav R/o Teliyanpar O.P. Kewra, P.S.- Punpun, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate For the State :
Mr.Md. Matloob Rab, APP For the informant :
Mr. Shahrukh Shiddiqui, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 13-05-2025 Heard Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shahrukh Shiddiquie representing the informant beside the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 68 of 2024 instituted under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 09.03.2024 by the informant, Manoj Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that his brother was requested to do photography in a marriage for which Rs. 20,000/- was due. When the same was demanded from this petitioner, he gave 'Kudal' blow on the head causing serious injury. When his brother raised alarm, allegation is that the petitioner's sons Risu Kumar and Amar Kumar as also his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12429 of 2025(3) dt.13-05-2025 2/2 wife armed variously and assaulted both the informant and his brother causing injuries. This led to the FIR after they were shifted to PMCH, Patna.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is case and counter case, the counter version is that on demand, he was informed that payment has been made, whereafter abuse took place which followed assault in which the informant's side also suffered injuries.
5. In this case, the informant is appearing and he has taken this Court to the injury report to show that skull has been injured and the same has been found to be grievous in nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts as also that a vital organ has been injured and the same has been found to be grievous, in that background, it would be appropriate that the petitioner seek bail.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T