Dharma Yadav @ Dharmraj Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35942 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2018 Thana- NATHNAGAR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1.

Dharma Yadav @ Dharmraj Yadav Son of Sitaram Yadav, Resident of village- Golahu, Police Station- Madhusudanpur, District- Bhagalpur 2.

Pappu Yadav Son of Late Vatu Yadav, Resident of village- Golahu, Police Station- Madhusudanpur, District- Bhagalpur 3.

Chandan Yadav Son of Late Vatu Yadav, Resident of village- Golahu, Police Station- Madhusudanpur, District- Bhagalpur 4.

Vikash Kumar @ Karu son of Baghi Yadav @ Bramdeo Yadav, Resident of village- Golahu, Police Station- Madhusudanpur, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dr. Manoj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 07-04-2021 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Nath Nagar (Madhusudanpur) P.S. Case No.187 of 2018 registered under Sections 341, 323, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The informant alleged that on 23.03.2018 at about 1:30 P.M. while he was going with the dead body of his mother for cremation and when he reached near Golahu main road, he heard the sound of firing. The informant rushed near the house and saw that the petitioners were fleeing away from the house of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35942 of 2020(2) dt.07-04-2021 2/2 the informant. They were indiscriminately firing. The boxes were found inside the courtyard. The petitioners are alleged to have taken away ornaments and cash from the house of the informant.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is omnibus and general allegation. There is a counter version being Nath Nagar (Madhusudanpur) P.S. Case No.100 of 2018. Now the case has been compromised but from perusal of the record, it appears that the informant was going with the dead body of his mother for cremation but taking advantage of absence of the informant, the petitioners and others entered into his house and took away different articles and they also made indiscriminate firing.

Having considered the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

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