Santosh Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21029 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-399 Year-2021 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria ====================================================== 1.
SANTOSH KUMAR YADAV SON OF BALRAM YADAV R/O VILLAGEKANKHUDIYA, TOLA- KACHNA, WARD NO.-04, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA 2.
BALRAM YADAV SON OF LATE MUSAI YADAV R/O VILLAGEKANKHUDIYA, TOLA- KACHNA, WARD NO.-04, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA 3.
OMNI DEVI @ UMNI DEVI WIFE OF BALRAM YADAV R/O VILLAGE- KANKHUDIYA, TOLA- KACHNA, WARD NO.-04, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA 4.
LAKSHMI THAKUR SON OF LATE DHANLAL THAKUR R/O VILLAGE- KANKHUDIYA, TOLA- KACHNA, WARD NO.-04, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA 5.
DILIP THAKUR SON OF LAKSHMI THAKUR R/O VILLAGEKANKHUDIYA, TOLA- KACHNA, WARD NO.-04, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA 6.
RAJ KUMAR YADAV SON OF MOHAN LAL YADAV R/O VILLAGEKANKHUDIYA, TOLA- KACHNA, WARD NO.-04, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA 7.
YUVRAJ PD. YADAV SON OF LATE CHANDRIKA YADAV R/O VILLAGE- GANGJHALI, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA 8.
BEDANAND YADAV SON OF LATE CHANDRIKA YADAV R/O VILLAGE- GANGJHALI, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA 9.
DINESH PD. YADAV SON OF LATE CHANDRIKA YADAV R/O VILLAGE- GANGJHALI, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA 10.
SAROJNI DEVI WIFE OF BEDANAND YADAV R/O VILLAGEGANGJHALI, P.S.- PALASI, DISTRICT- ARARIA ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
RAJ KUMAR RAHI SON OF LATE GOVIND LAL PANJIYAR ADVOCATE, R/O VILLAGE- KARAHBARI, WARD NO.-03, P.S.- SIKTI (BARDAHA), DISTRICT- ARARIA ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Kanchan Jha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Rajendra Prasad Nat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21029 of 2022(2) dt.21-09-2022 2/3 21-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Araria Complaint Case No. 399-C/2021 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 341, 323, 324, 379, 384 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per allegation in the FIR, all the accused persons including the petitioners have abused and assaulted the complainant and his fellow persons. It is further alleged that accused Raj Kumar Yadav has snatched Rs. 10,000/- from the pocket of the complainant.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Both parties are relatives. No injury report is brought on record to support the prosecution case. Only with a view to harass the petitioners, the present case has been filed by the complainant.
Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of Bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21029 of 2022(2) dt.21-09-2022 3/3 Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Araria Complaint Case No. 399C/2021, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Araria subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U