Ramashish Yadav @ Ramashish Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30341 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2024 Thana- TANKUPPA District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Ramashish Yadav @ Ramashish Prasad, Male, aged about 50 years, Son of Late Devan Yadav @ Deonandan Prasad.

2.

Vikash Kumar, Male, aged about 29 years, Son of Late Mahendra Yadav. 3.

Jitendra Yadav @ Jitendra Kumar, Male aged about 40 years, Son of Late Arjun Yadav @ Arjun Prasad.

All are resident of village - Akurhwa, P.S. - Tankuppa, District - Gaya, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Babu, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 24-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 24 of 2024 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 354, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant Ramvilash Yadav gave an application before Tankuppa police station for assisting attempt to murder, assaulted or uses criminal force at any women and arms act and on the aforesaid

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30341 of 2024(2) dt.24-04-2024 2/3 statement this case has been lodged.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence and have falsely been implicated in this case due to land dispute between the parties. There is case and counter case attributed between the parties. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. Petitioners are in custody since 27.02.2024.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.

6. From perusal of the FIR, injury report as produced by learned counsel for the petitioner and impugned order of the learned A.D.J.-Xth, Gaya dated 21.03.2024, it appears that petitioners are named in the FIR. From perusal of the injury report, which shows injuries are simple in nature but injuries are on vital parts of the body. On the basis of Radiological Report, all injuries are caused by hard and blunt substance and simple in nature. Considering the nature of injury which are simple in nature and other material of this case, the prayer for bail of the petitioners are allowed. Let the petitioners above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30341 of 2024(2) dt.24-04-2024 3/3 connection with Tankuppa PS Case No. 24 of 2024. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Anand Kr.

U T