Srikant Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33963 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-18 Year-2026 Thana- DEOKUND District- Aurangabad ====================================================== 1.
Srikant Yadav S/o Nandulal Yadav @ Nandlal Yadav R/o Village - Dular Bigha, P.S- Deokund, District - Aurangabad, Bihar 2.
Sangeeta Devi W/o Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Yadav R/o Village - Dular Bigha, P.S- Deokund, District - Aurangabad, Bihar 3.
Sumitra Devi W/o Jagda Yadav R/o Village - Dular Bigha, P.S- Deokund, District - Aurangabad, Bihar 4.
Ruby Devi @ Ruby Kumari W/o Srikant Yadav R/o Village - Dular Bigha, P.S- Deokund, District - Aurangabad, Bihar 5.
Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Yadav S/o Late Aganu Yadav @ Devbali Yadav R/o Village - Dular Bigha, P.S- Deokund, District - Aurangabad, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amrit Lal, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through virtual mode.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Deokund P.S. Case No. 18 of 2026, dated 08.03.2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 329(4), 126, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 74, 303(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per prosecution case, on 02.03.2026 at about
2/4 1:00 PM, upon a dispute relating to the informant's niece, the accused persons allegedly assaulted the informant Shravanti Devi and her son Deepu Kumar with lathi and danda, causing injuries to them. It is further alleged that the accused persons snatched away the gold chain and earrings of the informant and that co-accused Bucchi Kumar fired from a country-made pistol and threatened them with dire consequences. On information, police reached the place of occurrence and the injured were taken to hospital for treatment
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent, have not committed any offfence and have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that there is a case and counter-case with regard to the allegations levelled in the FIR. It is next submitted that after lodging of the FIR by the petitioners, the informant is said to have instituted the present case after a delay of six days, for which no explanation has been furnished in the FIR. It has next been submitted by referring to the statement made in para 12 of the anticipatory bail petition that all the injuries sustained are simple in nature, which has also been recorded in the impugned order, which clearly shows that in order to get over the cases lodged by the petitioners, the instant case has been lodged.
3/4
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and that there is a case and counter case, injury is being simple, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), Daudnagar in connection with |Deokund P.S. Case No. 18 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- (i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative/known of the petitioners who shall provide official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide; (ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of
4/4 his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself; (iii) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioners shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) Abhishek/- U T