Guddu Yadav @ Ranjit Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3038 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2020 Thana- KIUL District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== 1.

Guddu Yadav @ Ranjit Yadav S/O Late Ramchander Yadav Resident Of Village-Lakhochak, P.S.-KIUL, District-Lakhisarai. 2.

Kaushaliya Devi W/O Late Ramchander Yadav Resident Of VillageLakhochak, P.S.-KIUL, District-Lakhisarai. 3.

Geeta Devi W/O Guddu Yadav @ Ranjit Yadav Resident Of VillageLakhochak, P.S.-KIUL, District-Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-07-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State through virtual mode.

Counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks from the date of restoration of normalcy. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 341, 324, 308, 427, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation is that petitioner No.1 assaulted the informant by means of khanti on his head, as a result of which he sustained injuries on his head and due to assault the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3038 of 2021(2) dt.08-07-2021 2/3 informant became unconscious and fell down. Petitioners No.2 and 3 assaulted the informant by means of bricks and stone. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioners No.2 and 3 are ladies. The nature of injury is said to be simple. At best, an offence under Section 324 of I.P.C. is made out. From perusal of the order of the Sessions Court, it appears that the informant has retracted from his earlier statement made in the F.I.R. and has filed a petition in the court below, in which he states that he does not want to pursue the present case.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioners are named in the complaint case/F.I.R. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the lockdown, the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on their personal bond to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Lakhisarai in connection with Kiul P.S. case No.90 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3038 of 2021(2) dt.08-07-2021 3/3 Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioners will furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T