Lalu Yadav @ Lallu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39064 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-393 Year-2023 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Lalu Yadav @ Lallu Yadav S/o Naresh Yadav R/o vill - Chakdaulat, P.S. - Bakhtiyarpur, Distt. - Patna 2.

Ranjeet Kumar S/o Ramsewak Singh R/o vill - Chakdaulat, P.S. - Bakhtiyarpur, Distt. - Patna 3.

Janardan Yadav @ Jalandhar Yadav @ Jailer Yadav @ Janardan Singh S/o Umesh Yadav R/o vill - Chakdaulat, P.S. - Bakhtiyarpur, Distt. - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 16-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 307 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, while the informant along with three others were returning to their village, petitioners along with other co-accused started firing upon them.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He next sub-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39064 of 2024(2) dt.16-07-2024 2/2 mits that there is land dispute between them and the informant and petitioners are resident of same village and they have got clean antecedent as stated in para-3 of the petition.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that if anticipatory bail will be granted to the petitioners, then the investigation will be affected.

6. On perusal of the first information report and impugned order dated 02.03.2024, it appears that the petitioners are named in the FIR and statement of witnesses in paragraph nos.4, 5, 58, 59, 60, 61 and 62 from the case diary have supported the case of the prosecution, also five empty cartridges were recovered from the possession of the petitioners and the investigation is going on and considering the seriousness of the allegations, it does not seems justified to release the petitioners on anticipatory bail, therefore, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

7. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) saurabhkr/- U T