Navin Yadav @ Navin Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16293 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-294 Year-2024 Thana- THALI District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.

Navin Yadav @ Navin Kumar S/O Suresh Yadav Resident of VillageMaheshpur, P.S.- Thali, District- Nawada. 2.

Raifal Yadav @ Chhatish Kumar @ Chhatish Yadav S/O Suresh Yadav Resident of Village- Maheshpur, P.S.- Thali, District- Nawada. 3.

Arjun Yadav S/O Samman Yadav Resident of Village- Maheshpur, P.S.- Thali, District- Nawada.

4.

Naresh Yadav S/O Samman Yadav Resident of Village- Maheshpur, P.S.- Thali, District- Nawada.

5.

Navalesh Yadav @ Kundan Yadav @ Kundan Kumar S/O Umesh Yadav Resident of Village- Maheshpur, P.S.- Thali, District- Nawada. 6.

Lala Yadav @ Laljit Yadav @ Lala S/O Naresh Yadav Resident of VillageMaheshpur, P.S.- Thali, District- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar No. I For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State, Shri Chandra Bhushan Prasad. 2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Thali P.S. Case No. 294 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126, 115(2), 117(3), 118(2), 109, 61, 111, 303(2), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No. 1 has antecedent of one case, Petitioner Nos. 2

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16293 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 2/3 and 3 have antecedent of two cases, Petitioner No. 4 has antecedent of four cases and Petitioner Nos. 5 and 6 are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that accused persons intercepted him and his brother and assaulted by sharpedged weapon causing injury. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the allegation of assault is general and omnibus in nature, i.e., no specific allegation of assault is alleged. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits no doubt that the allegation of assault is not specific but then the injury suffered by Kuldeep and Bharat is opined to be grievous and they have suffered multiple injuries. It is also submitted that when assault takes place in the manner as alleged in the FIR, the best way to cull out the allegation is the nature of injuries and in the instant case, the injured have suffered multiple injuries. It is next submitted that petitioners also have antecedent. 6.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is in complete agreement with the submission made by the learned APP, as such is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16293 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 3/3 7.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T