Gorakh Yadav @ Gorakh Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41162 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2025 Thana- DANIYAWAN District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Gorakh Yadav @ Gorakh Singh S/o Late Krishna Yadav R/o Village- Nimi, P.S.- Daniyawan, District- Patna 2.
Umashankar Yadav @ Uma Shankar Yadav @ Uma Shankar S/o Late Krishna Yadav R/o Village- Nimi, P.S.- Daniyawan, District- Patna 3.
Chotelal Singh Yadav @ Chote Lal Yadav @ Chote Lal Singh S/o Late Krishna Yadav R/o Village- Nimi, P.S.- Daniyawan, District- Patna 4.
Teni Kumar @ Teni Yadav @ Ravi Shankar Kumar S/o Late Krishna Yadav R/o Village- Nimi, P.S.- Daniyawan, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amit Narayan For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the petition with regard to petitioner No. 2 namely Umashankar Yadav @ Uma Shankar Yadav @ Uma Shankar since he has been arrested.
3. Permission is accorded.
2/4
4. Accordingly, the petition with respect to petitioner No. 2 stands dismissed as withdrawn.
5. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner No. 1, 3 & 4, apprehending their arrest in a case instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 329(4), 74, 76, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
6. As per the allegations made in the F.I.R., on the alleged date and time of occurrence, co-accused Neetu Devi came to the house of the informant and engaged in a dispute with her regarding installmentrelated issues of a local committee. When the informant objected, she was allegedly abused by Neetu Devi, who then returned to her home. It is further alleged that in the evening, the co-accused persons, along with the petitioners-who were variously armed-came to the informant's house, abused her, and physically assaulted her. It is also alleged that her daughter-in-law, Sunita
3/4 Devi, was assaulted during the incident. Furthermore, coaccused Uma Shankar Yadav allegedly dragged the informant and threw her out of the house, while petitioners Chhote Yadav and Teeni Yadav are alleged to have outraged her modesty. As a result of the entire incident, both the informant and her daughter-in-law are said to have sustained injuries.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. They have falsely been implicated in the present case in the background of previous dispute. It is further submitted that both parties belong to same family and there is case and counter case between them. There is land dispute between them. It is further submitted that Section 109 of BNS does not attract towards the petitioners.
8. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
4/4
9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner No. 1, 3 & 4 on bail. The petitioner Nos. 1, 3 & 4 are directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Daniyawan P.S. Case no. 78 of 2025, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna City, Patna, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(S. B. Pd. Singh, J) Nirajkrs/- U T