Bhaskar Yadav @ Bhaskar Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12592 of 2017 (3) dt.01-07-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.12592 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -136 Year- 2016 Thana -JANKINAGAR District- PURNIA ======================================================

1. Bhaskar Yadav @ Bhaskar Kumar, Son of Late Sudish Yadav.

2. Diwakar Kumar @ Diwakar Yadav, Son of Late Sudish Yadv.

3. Jyotish Kumar, Son of Shailendra Yadav, All residents of Village - Janki Nagar, Police Station - Janki Nagar, District - Purnea. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ahtash Ali Khan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Jankinagar P.S. Case No. 136 of 2016, registered under Sections 341, 323 and 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Purnea. The accusation is that, on 08.10.2016, Pankaj Kumar Ravi, brother of the informant, along with one Bipin Yadav moved on motorcycle to attend the function in the village Dhima Tola. In the way, petitioner no. 2, Diwakar Yadav, stopped the motorcycle and pulled his brother and started to cause assault. At that time, Bipin Yadav fled away and told the informant that petitioner no. 2,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12592 of 2017 (3) dt.01-07-2017 Diwakar Yadav took Pankaj Kuamar Ravi anywhere by causing assault. The informant raised suspicion about kidnapping of his brother by petitioner no. 3, Diwakar Yadav, Babu Yadav and Gopal Yadav.

Learned counsel for the informant submits that the victim returned at his house after three days and narrated the incident disclosing the name of the petitioners having their hand in his kidnapping by causing assault and also to make demand of ransom of Rs.20,00,000/-. Moreover, the injuries were also found on the person of the brother of the informant. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioners are directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T