Dinesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.74645 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2018 Thana- KAJRA District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Dinesh Yadav, Son of Sukhdeo Yadav, Resident of Village- Bataspur, Police Station- Chanan, District- Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Ram Sumiran Roy ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 21-12-2018 Heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Kajra P.S. case No. 31 of 2018 registered under Section 307, 353 and some other Sections of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 27 of Arms Act and under Section 16, 17, 18, 20, 23 of the U.P.A. Act.

The informant got information that many dreaded Naxalites had assembled and they were planning for committing some occurrence of huge magnitude. The informant further alleged and named 18 persons, including the petitioner, that they were associated with banned organization and providing inputs to the hard core Naxalites with regard to movement of Cobra Battalion, CRPF and District police. The police made search of entire area and recovered huge quantity of arms and ammunition but the Naxalites managed to flee away after getting inputs from the petitioner and others about movement of the police. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.74645 of 2018(2) dt.21-12-2018 2/2 that petitioner is not a member of Naxal organization. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he provided inputs to Naxal organization about the movement of the police force. It appears that there is allegation that the petitioner provided inputs to the Naxalites who had assembled and on raid huge quantity of arms and ammunition were recovered but after having received inputs from the petitioner and others the Naxalites managed to flee away. The petitioner has got criminal antecedent and he is accused in as many as four criminal cases registered under Section 307 and other Sections of the IPC. Considering the facts aforesaid and nature of allegation made against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

If the petitioner surrenders in the court below, i.e. learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Lakhisarai in Kajra P.S. case No. 31 of 2018, the learned court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner on its merit without being prejudiced from the order of this court.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T