Mahesh Yadav @ Mahesh Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31707 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2024 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== Mahesh Yadav @ Mahesh Prasad S/O Raghunandan Prasad @ Raghunandan Yadav Resident of Village- Rangupur, Police Station- Atri, Distt.- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 260 of 2024 registered on 20.07.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115, 118(1), 117, 118(2), 109 of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged against thirteen named accused persons, alleging that all of them, being variously armed, attacked the son-in-law of the informant and caused him grievous injuries. It is specifically alleged against the petitioner that he cut the right leg of the informant's son-in-law with a sword.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is further submitted that the allegations made in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31707 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 2/2 the FIR are general and omnibus in nature against all thirteen accused persons named therein. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Learned counsel further submits that there exists a case and counter-case between the parties arising out of the same date and place of occurrence. He also submits that, vide order dated 24.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19986 of 2025, a co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court has granted anticipatory bail to similarly situated co-accused persons.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that there is a specific allegation in the FIR against the petitioner, wherein it is alleged that he cut the leg of the informant while the allegations against the coaccused persons, who have been granted anticipatory bail, are general and omnibus in nature.

6. Considering the specific allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R., this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 260 of 2024, pending before the learned CJM, Gaya is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Ashwini/- U T