Mahendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10889 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2023 Thana- GURARU District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Mahendra Yadav S/O Bisheshwar Yadav R/O Village - Bandaul, P.S.- Guraru, District -Gaya.
2.
Binay Yadav @ Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar S/O Bisheshwar Yadav R/O Village - Bandaul, P.S.- Guraru, District -Gaya 3.
Ranjeet Yadav @ Rajit Yadav S/O Mahendra Yadav R/O Village - Bandaul, P.S.- Guraru, District -Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Durgesh Nandan, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 02-07-2025 Mr. Durgesh Nandan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Guraru P.S. Case No. 150 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 147, 323, 341, 308, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, lodged on 13.08.2023 by the informant, Rampati Yadav.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that while working in the field, the accused persons came armed variously and allegation is that Mahendra and Satendra
2/5 assaulted by wooden stick causing injury, when his son and daughter-in-law came to rescue, allegation is that Surendra Yadav also assaulted them causing fracture in the hands of his daughter-in-law. This led to the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as the petitioner no.2, Binay Yadav @ Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar and petitioner no. 3, Ranjeet Yadav @ Rajit Yadav respectively are concerned, no specific role has been assigned to them. Further, to his knowledge, the injury inflicted by petitioner no.1 Mahendra Yadav have been found to be simple in nature. Last submission is that without accepting the allegation or outcome of the petition those granted relief intend to pay Rs.10,000/- each by Demand Draft to the informant towards treatment issued by the local branch of the State Bank of India.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail and has taken this Court to injury report which is now on record, as the case diary was called for, it shows that the opinion was reserved in the matter.
6. Considering the allegation that has come against the petitioner no.1, Mahendra Yadav, it would be appropriate that he seek bail.
3/5
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail for petitioner no.1, Mahendra Yadav stands rejected.
8. So far as the petitioner no.2, Binay Yadav @ Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar and petitioner no. 3, Ranjeet Yadav @ Rajit Yadav are concerned as roles have not been assigned to them, FIR is there, they shall be facing the trial, have no criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- each (totaling Rs.20,000) by Demand Draft to the informant issued by the local branch of State Bank of India and the receipt has to be submitted before the Trial Court and after checking credentials to be handed over to the informant.
9. Let the petitioner no.2, Binay Yadav @ Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar and petitioner no. 3, Ranjeet Yadav @ Rajit Yadav be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-X, Gaya, in connection with Guraru P.S. Case No. 150 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.,
4/5 as also with the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner no.2, Binay Yadav @ Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar and petitioner no. 3, Ranjeet Yadav @ Rajit Yadav who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner no.2, Binay Yadav @ Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar and petitioner no. 3, Ranjeet Yadav @ Rajit Yadav shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner no.2, Binay Yadav @ Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar and petitioner no. 3, Ranjeet Yadav @ Rajit Yadav shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for next six months to mark their attendance; (iv) the petitioner no.2, Binay Yadav @ Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar and petitioner no. 3, Ranjeet Yadav @ Rajit Yadav shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
5/5 (v) the petitioner no.2, Binay Yadav @ Binay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar and petitioner no. 3, Ranjeet Yadav @ Rajit Yadav shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T