Manoj Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59155 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2024 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

Manoj Yadav, S/o- Mahakant Yadav Village- Sarisab Pahi West, Ps- Pandaul Dist- Madhubani 2.

Pramila Devi @ Pramika Devi @ Pramila wife of Mahakant Yadav VillageSarisab Pahi West, Ps- Pandaul Dist- Madhubani 3.

Darsnia Devi @ Darsna Kumari son of Manoj Yadav Village- Sarisab Pahi West, Ps- Pandaul Dist- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pravashankar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uday Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-08-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that inadvertently petitioner no.3, who is wife of petitioner no.1, has been described as son of petitioner no.1 and thus, seeks permission to make rectification in the description of the petitioner no.3.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59155 of 2024(2) dt.20-08-2024 2/3

4. Permission is accorded.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 has antecedent of two cases and petitioner nos.2 and 3 are persons with clean antecedent and are women and the informant alleges that on 22.03.2024, his agnates were putting pillars on his land, on objection, the accused persons started abusing him and on protest, Manoj and Mahakant assaulted by an iron khanti causing injury on head. Further, on account of assault of Mahakant, his left thumb was fractured. Further, Manoj assaulted his wife and Mahakant along with petitioner nos.2 and 3 assaulted his neighbours.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that from bare perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that petitioners and the informant are agnates and they are having dispute relating to land. It is next submitted that no doubt, the injury suffered by the injured is simple in nature, though one of the injuries on thumb of the informant is opined to be grievous but then, allegation of assaulting the informant causing grievous injury is against Mahakant. It is also submitted that petitioner nos.2 and 3, being women, have been falsely implicated with general and omnibus allegation.

7. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59155 of 2024(2) dt.20-08-2024 3/3 application.

8. 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 Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Madhubani in connection with Pandaul P. S. Case No.84 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

9. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T