Prakash Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46171 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2025 Thana- Mufassil District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
Prakash Yadav S/O Late Lakshmi Yadav Resident of Chamman Tola, Police Station- Sahebpur Kamal, District- Begusarai. 2.
Balram Yadav S/O Late Lakshmi Yadav Resident of Chamman Tola, Police Station- Sahebpur Kamal, District- Begusarai. 3.
Kishnandan yadav S/O Late Lakshmi Yadav Resident of Chamman Tola, Police Station- Sahebpur Kamal, District- Begusarai. 4.
Raushan Yadav @ Raushan Yadav S/O Kishnandan Yadav Resident of Chamman Tola, Police Station- Sahebpur Kamal, District- Begusarai. 5.
Kaushal Kumar S/O Kishnandan Yadav Resident of Chamman Tola, Police Station- Sahebpur Kamal, District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-11-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, informant, namely Raja Ram Yadav, alleged that on 20.03.2025 at about 2 PM, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46171 of 2025(3) dt.04-11-2025 2/2 assaulted grandson of informant due to which he died.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, due to old enmity, this false and concocted case has been lodged. There is case and counter-case.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and submitted that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that they, along with other accused persons, assaulted grandson of informant as a result of which he died. The post mortem report also corroborates the allegation levelled in the F.I.R..
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and specific and direct nature of accusation, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T