Arjun Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55194 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-73 Year-2021 Thana- RAHIKA District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

Arjun Yadav Son of Jawahar Yadav Residento of Villege - Kamalpur Tole Dubiyahi ward No.4, P.s.- Rahika, Distt.- Madhubani. 2.

Mohan Yadav Son of Jawahar Yadav Residento of Villege - Kamalpur Tole Dubiyahi ward No.4, P.s.- Rahika, Distt.- Madhubani. 3.

Shatrudhan Yadav @ Shatrudhan Son of Jawahar Yadav Residento of Villege - Kamalpur Tole Dubiyahi ward No.4, P.s.- Rahika, Distt.- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-07-2022 Heard both parties.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Rahika P.S. Case No. 73 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 308, 323 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, on the order of coaccused Jawahar Yadav, Arjun Yadav petitioner no. 1 assaulted the informant by means of Tengari on his head, Mohan petitioner no. 2 assaulted the informant by means of Farsa and Shatrudhan Yadav petitioner no. 3 assaulted the informant by means of rod, as result of which informant sustained grievous

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55194 of 2021(3) dt.11-07-2022 2/2 injury.

It is submitted that due to land dispute free fight took place between the parties in which both sides sustained injuries. Case and counter case. Petitioners have got clean antecedents. Counsel for State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is specific and direct allegation against petitioners that they assaulted, as a result of which sustained grievous injury.

Considering the facts aforesaid and nature of injury, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners above-named on anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T