Sanjeev Kumar @ Sundip Yadav @ Sanjiv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58288 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2023 Thana- MAHKAR District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Sanjeev Kumar @ Sundip Yadav @ Sanjiv Kumar Son Of Rajeshwar Prasad Resident Of Village-Khuda, Police Station-Mankar, District-Gaya 2.

Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Yadav Son Of Rajeshwar Prasad Resident Of Village-Khuda, Police Station-Mankar, District-Gaya 3.

Ashok Kumar @ Ashok Yadav Son Of Rajeshwar Prasad Resident Of Village-Khuda, Police Station-Mankar, District-Gaya 4.

Rajeev Kumar @ Rajiv Yadav Son Of Rajeshwar Prasad Resident Of Village-Khuda, Police Station-Mankar, District-Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Aryan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 05-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Petitioners are said to have assaulted the informant and his family members due to which they got multiple injuries on the different parts of the body.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58288 of 2023(3) dt.05-03-2024 2/3 this case. He submits that occurrence took place on 19.03.2023 but the FIR has been lodged on 22.03.2023 after delay of 3 days without explaining any reasonable cause of delay. He submits that there is general and omnibus allegation levelled against the petitioner nos. 2 and 4. He further submits that petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail submits that the injury found upon the victim is grievous in nature.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is general and omnibus allegation levelled against the petitioner nos. 2 and 4, let the above named petitioner nos. 2 and 4 in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Mahkar P.S. Case No. 65 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. So far as petitioner nos. 1 and 3 is concerned, there is specific overt act against them, I am not inclined to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58288 of 2023(3) dt.05-03-2024 3/3 enlarge the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with the aforesaid case.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T