Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26434 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2019 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== MANOJ YADAV @ MANOJ KUMAR YADAV Son of Rajendra Yadav Resident of Laxminia Ward No.5, P.S.- Ghailarh, District- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dinesh Prasad Verma For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Bishweshwar Ram ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 23-04-2019 Heard both sides.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Madhepura P.S. Case No.113 of 2019 registered under Sections 341, 323, 353, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 37(b)(c) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
The police on information that three persons, who were in inebriated condition, were raising hue and cry and creating nuisance, went to the place of occurrence. When the police were getting them seated in the jeep two persons assaulted the police and managed to flee away. Third person was apprehended who disclosed his name as Kishore Yadav. Kishore Yadav disclosed the name of the petitioner as Manoj Yadav and Kailu Yadav who managed to flee away.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26434 of 2019(2) dt.23-04-2019 2/2 petitioner was not apprehended by the police rather the police implicated the petitioner in the case on the statement of an inebriated person. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. It appears from the facts that petitioner and two other persons had taken wine and they were creating nuisance on such, the police came and apprehended three persons but the petitioner and Kailu Yadav assaulted the police and managed to flee away from there.
Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T