Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23983/2019dismissed

Sahdeo Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2019-09-20Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23983 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2017 Thana- KHODAWANDPUR District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.

SAHDEO YADAV Son of Ram Charitr Yadav Resident of Village - Narayan Pipar, P.S.- Khodamandpur (Chhorahi O.P), Distt.- Begusarai. 2.

Jay Jay Ram Yadav Son of Ram Narayan Yadav Resident of Village - Narayan Pipar, P.S.- Khodamandpur (Chhorahi O.P), Distt.- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 20-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 379, 354(B), 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Khodamandpur Chhorahi (OP) P.S. Case No. 42/2017.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the backdrop of land dispute. The accusation of assault against the petitioner no. 2 is general and omnibus in nature along with other co-accused persons, who are said to have assaulted the informant's side. It is submitted that the petitioner no. 1 along with co-accused Wakil Yadav is said to have assaulted Ram Jatan Yadav, Prasidh Yadav and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23983 of 2019(3) dt.20-09-2019 2/2 Brahmadeo Yadav while petitioner no. 2 along with co-accused Ram Narayan Yadav is said to have assaulted the informant on his head. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP on the other hand invites reference to para 27 of the case diary containing the injury report of Prasidh Yadav as well as the informant and submits that both of them have sustained grievous injury.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations, gravity of offence alleged and the injury sustained by the informant's side, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/- U T