Ramayan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55707 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2024 Thana- GUTHANI District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.
Ramayan Yadav S/o- Raj Banshi Yadav @ Rajbali Yadav Resident of Village- Tekania P.S. Guthani, Dist- Siwan 2.
Jyoti Kumari D/o- Ramayan Yadav Resident of Village- Tekania P.S. Guthani, Dist- Siwan 3.
Priti Kumari D/o- Ramayan Yadav Resident of Village- Tekania P.S. Guthani, Dist- Siwan 4.
Amar Yadav @ Amar Nath Yadav S/o- Ramayan Yadav Resident of VillageTekania P.S. Guthani, Dist- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Nirmala Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-09-2025 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners; Ms. Nirmala Kumari, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Guthani P.S. Case No. 167 of 2024 registered under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, all the accused persons assaulted the informant and the son of the informant and they also committed theft.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55707 of 2025(2) dt.09-09-2025 2/3 petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submitted that there is case and counter case between the parties and the petitioners lodged an FIR bearing Guthani P.S. Case No. 165 of 2024 against the informant and other persons. In self-defence, the petitioners may have caused some injury to the informant. Learned counsel submitted that there is land dispute between the parties. The petitioners have clean antecedent. On these grounds, the petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in the FIR and cognizance has already been taken under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, there is no question of tempering of record or influencing the witnesses. There is case and counter case between the parties and the petitioners are having clean antecedent, I am of the opinion that the petitioners have made out a case to be released on anticipatory bail
7. The learned District Court is directed to release the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55707 of 2025(2) dt.09-09-2025 3/3 petitioners on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate - Ist Class, Siwan in connection with Guthani P.S. Case No. 167 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners, as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is pending against the petitioners, as what has been stated in paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically. (Purnendu Singh, J) Ashishsingh/- U T