Addition Kumar @ Soni Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52691 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2021 Thana- KASIMBAZAR District- Munger ====================================================== Addition Kumar @ Soni Yadav S/o- Umesh Prasad Yadav @ Umesh Yadav R/o Village- Naulakha, P.S.- Kasim Bazar, District- Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 61373 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2021 Thana- KASIMBAZAR District- Munger ====================================================== Sanku Yadav @ Shiv Shankar @ Shiv Shankar Kumar Son of Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Resident of Village - Naulakha, P.S. - Naya Ram Nagar, District - Munger.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 52691 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kaushal Kumar Jha Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 61373 of 2021) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raj Kishor Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha Mr. Kaushal Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Kasim Bazar P.S. Case No.140 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52691 of 2021(5) dt.13-07-2022 2/2 case. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is general and omnibus. It is submitted that the specific allegation is against Guddu Yadav. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner of Cr. Misc. No.52691 of 2021 has got no criminal antecedent whereas petitioner of Cr. Misc. No.61373 of 2021 has got one criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail applications.

The learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and there is ample evidence in the case diary to show the involvement of the petitioners in the present case.

From perusal of the case diary, it appears that there are sufficient materials against the petitioners to show their involvement in the alleged offence.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.) Sanjay/- U T