Guddu Yadav @ Kishore Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22381 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2022 Thana- SONO District- Jamui ====================================================== Guddu Yadav @ Kishore Yadav Son Of Late Rajo Yadav R/O VillageAsrahua, P.S.- Charkapathar (SONO), District- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate Ms. Anisha Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rita Verma For the Informant :

Dr. Ramakant Akela Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on account of a dispute relating to land, accused Dayanand inflicted sword blow on his head causing injury, further Durga and Vikas assaulted Baban by lathi causing injury on head, thereafter Ravinder assaulted him by rod on account of which he fell on the ground, and the petitioner assaulted Lakhi Yadav causing injury on head.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22381 of 2023(3) dt.11-07-2023 2/2 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR it would manifest that the informant does not allege that by what the petitioner assaulted Lakhi Yadav, it is next submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then the injuries suffered by Lakhi Yadav is simple in nature.

Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant oppose the anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sono (Charkapathar) P.S. Case No. 296 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T