Mukesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25526 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2020 Thana- BAHERI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Mukesh Yadav son of Lalu Yadav Resident of Village- Sher, P.S.- Baheri, Dist.- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Akbar Ali, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-04-2024 Heard Mr. Sumit Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Akbar Ali, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Baheri P.S. Case No. 79 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 342, 323, 324, 325, 384, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., the petitioner along with other co-accused are said to have demanded extortion from the son of the informant and on objection made by him, co-accused Vikash Yadav assaulted on the head of the son of the informant by means of dagger causing head injury and co-accused Kunj Bihari assaulted on the leg of the son of the informant by means of iron rod causing fracture injury on leg. The petitioner and co-accused Kunj Bihari are

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25526 of 2024(2) dt.24-04-2024 2/3 said to have demanded extortion from the son of the informant.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that on the order of one co-accused Vikash Yadav, another co-accused Kunj Bihari has allegedly assaulted the son of the informant causing injury on parietal region of the son of the informant. There is no allegation of assault against the petitioner. The allegation against the petitioner is that of demanding extortion, but no specific amount of extortion demanded by the petitioner has been mentioned in the F.I.R. In omnibus manner, it has been alleged in the F.I.R. that 35,000/- was demanded by the accused persons, but no specific allegation has been made against the petitioner that he had demanded the said amount. Petitioner has clean antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner being general and omnibus, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25526 of 2024(2) dt.24-04-2024 3/3 Magistrate-IX, Darbhanga in connection with Baheri P.S. Case No. 79 of 2020, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Purnendu Singh, J) mantreshwar/- U T