Guddu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48805 of 2021 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.432 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2021 Thana- DEO District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Guddu Yadav Son of Mohan Yadav Resident of Village - Harikirtan Bigha, P.S.- Deo Distt.- Aurangabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjit Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madhura Nand Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 26-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Deo P.S. Case No.46 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 186, 353, 332, 333, 504, 506, 189, 190, 224 and 225 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant who is a police officer alleged that on 16.05.2021 at about 04.20 in the morning, he got secret information that the accused of Deo P.S. Case No.23 of 2021, namely, Guddu Yadav is present in his house. The informant raided the house of Guddu Yadav. Guddu Yadav tried to escape but the police officials caught him. Thereafter Guddu Yadav succeeded in fleeing away from the clutches of the police. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48805 of 2021(2) dt.26-04-2022 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation is false and concocted. It is submitted that the wife of the petitioner filed a complaint case against the informant that the informant demanded rangdari from the petitioner and that is why the petitioner has been implicated in the present case.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has got ten criminal antecedents.

Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has got ten criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, if petitioner surrenders before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in accordance with law. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.) Sanjay/- U T