Sudarshan Yadav @ Sudharsan Yadav And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.63611 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -236 Year- 2017 Thana -MAJHAULIA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================

1. Sudarshan Yadav @ Sudharsan Yadav

2. Devnath Yadav

3. Jangbahadur Yadav @ Janbahadur Yadav

4. Parsan Yadaav .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sir Pawan Kumar Chaurasiya ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 12-01-2018 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Majhauliya P.S. case No. 236 of 2017 under Section 147, 149, 323, 324, 387, 427 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that while he was ploughing his field all the petitioners assaulted him and they also punctured all the four tyres of his tractor by piercing spear in the tyres. When the mother of informant came to save, she was also assaulted. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is counter version being Majhauliya P.S. case No. 237 of 2017. Jangbahadur Yadav, petitioner No.3, is informant of the case. There is bonafide land dispute between both sides. Mother of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63611 of 2017 (2) dt.12-01-2018 2/2 the informant got simple injury.

On the other hand the learned counsel for the informant submitted that informant got grievous injury in his eye as Jangbahadur Yadav is alleged to have broken the window pan of the car causing injury in the eye. It is further submitted that Jangbahadur Yadav and Sudarshan Yadav are also accused in Majhauliya P.S. case No. 251 of 2014 and they are in the habit of grabbing land of others.

Considering the facts that petitioners No.1, Sudarshan Yadav and petitioner No.3, Jangbahadur Yadav, got criminal antecedent and there is allegation that all the accused persons assaulted the informant and also punctured the tyres of tractor of the informant, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T