Medni Yadav@Medo Yadav@Medni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19162 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2021 Thana- SALAKHUA District- Saharsa ====================================================== 1.

MEDNI YADAV@MEDO YADAV@MEDNI SON OF LATE NEERO YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KORLAHA, MORKAHI, P.S.- SALKHUA, DISTRICT- SAHARSA 2.

CHANDRA SHEKHAR YADAV SON OF MEDNI @ MEDO YADAV @ MEDNI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KORLAHA, MORKAHI, P.S.- SALKHUA, DISTRICT- SAHARSA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual Court proceedings. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleges that on account of land dispute between the parties, the present occurrence is alleged to have been committed in which it is alleged that petitioner no. 1 assaulted her sister-in-law causing injury on her head and petitioner no. 2 assaulted Deep Narayan with khanti causing grievous injury. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and on account of land dispute, the present occurrence took place, it is also submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19162 of 2022(2) dt.30-09-2022 2/2 that as far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, he is alleged to have assaulted the sister-in-law of the informant causing injury which is said to be simple in nature, learned counsel next very fairly submitted that the injury suffered by Deep Narayan is grievous. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioner no. 1 who is aged about 70 years, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Salkhua P.S. Case No. 212 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

As far as petitioner no.2, Chandra Shekhar Yadav is concerned, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to him. His prayer for anticipatory bail is thus rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) gauravkr/- U T