Kranti Yadav @ Kranti Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 46051 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2024 Thana- DHAMDAHA District- Purnia ====================================================== Kranti Yadav @ Kranti Kumar Son of Jay Kishor Yadav Resident of Kukroun, Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Dhamdaha, District - Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Md Fazle Karim, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 05-08-2025 Heard Mr. Md. Fazle Karim, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned APP for the State. 2.The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhamdaha P.S. Case No. 96 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 307, 354, 354B, 379, 34, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner assaulted with kudal on the head of the son of the complainant namely, Nitish Kumar.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case. He also submits that this case is based on complaint petitioner, which was ultimately registered FIR under Section 156 of Clause-3 of the Cr.P.C. It has also been submitted that the occurrence is of 12.02.2024, whereas the Complaint Petition was filed on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 46051 of 2025(2) dt.05-08-2025 2/2 22.03.2024, approximately after more than half months of delay, which is not explained by the prosecution. From perusal of the injury report, it will transpire that Nitish Kumar has received simple injury. He further submits that a statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.
5. In contra, learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner.
6. 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 on bail. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender in connection with Dhamdaha P.S. Case No. 96 of 2024, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T