Pappu Yadav @ Pappu Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28552 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2020 Thana- KUSHESHWARASTHAN DistrictDarbhanga ====================================================== PAPPU YADAV @ PAPPU KUMAR YADAV Son of Shivdhari Yadav Resident of Village- Bahera, Ward No.-2, P.S.- Kusheshwar Asthan, DistrictDarbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Parasmani, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 523, 324, 307 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleges that he was brutally assaulted by the accused persons as detailed in the FIR and the petitioner on order of Shivdhari assaulted him by Farsa causing injury on head and assaulted Kailash with khanti causing fracture on hand.

The learned counsel submits that the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28552 of 2022(2) dt.15-11-2022 2/3 is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that the petitioner was not even present at the place of occurrence when the alleged occurrence took place, it is also submitted that police after investigation submitted Final Form in favour of the petitioner but the learned Magistrate differing with the police report took cognizance of the offence against the petitioner. Learned counsel next submits that when one Investigating Agency after carrying out threadbare investigation found the case false against the petitioner then would it be justifiable that based on the same investigation when cognizance has been taken the petitioner be sent to jail.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, 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) with two sureties of the like amount

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28552 of 2022(2) dt.15-11-2022 3/3 each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Kusheshwar Ashtan P.S. Case No. 88 of 2020 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) GauravSinha/- U T