Biro Yadav @ Birendra Yadav @ Birendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27483 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-361 Year-2024 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Biro Yadav @ Birendra Yadav @ Birendra Kumar S/O Poras Yadav Resident of village- Araria, PS- Parbatta, (madaiya), Dist.- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Parbatta (Madaiya OP) P.S. Case No. 361 of 2024, dated 01.09.2024, lodged under Section 126(2), 115(2), 109, 324(4), 324(5), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "BNS, 2023") and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against four named accused persons, including the present petitioners, alleging that they fired 5-6 rounds at the informant's brother, and subsequently, at around 9:30, they attacked again, during which the informant sustained injuries to his ear. Further, there is an allegation of snatching gold and Rs. 5,000/-.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27483 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that the cause of dispute arises from the destruction of agricultural produce standing in the field. Counsel further submits that the allegations are general and omnibus in nature, and there are no direct or specific allegations against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean, there are four criminal cases pending against him, he is on bail in all those cases.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is an allegation of repeated firing by the group of accused persons.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T