Bikash Yadav @ Bikah Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53713 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-217 Year-2024 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
BIKASH YADAV @ BIKAH YADAV SON OF SUKHO YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - BARAHRA, P.S. - GOGRI, DISTRICT - KHAGARIA 2.
KRISHNA KUMAR SON OF VANSHRAJ YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - BARAHRA, P.S. - GOGRI, DISTRICT - KHAGARIA 3.
SULENA DEVI WIFE OF BIKASH YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - BARAHRA, P.S. - GOGRI, DISTRICT - KHAGARIA ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amar Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-08-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 354(A) and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of two cases and petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that accused persons entered his house and petitioner no. 1 assaulted him by an iron rod causing injury on head, further the other accused persons assaulted his wife and snatched her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53713 of 2024(2) dt.07-08-2024 2/3 chain.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case and on intervention of well wishers, the matter has been compromised, further no injury was caused, as such, the order impugned also does not discuss anything about the injury. It is next submitted that from perusal of Annexure-2, it would manifest that the issue in between the petitioner and the informant stands compromised by a compromise dated 19.06.2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Gogri P.S. Case No. 217 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53713 of 2024(2) dt.07-08-2024 3/3
7. However, the learned Trial Court before accepting the anticipatory bail bonds of the petitioners shall verify from the informant as to whether the compromise is genuine or not and in the event if the informant disputes the compromise, in that event the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to.
8. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T