Satyendra Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57043 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-862 Year-2021 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== Satyendra Kumar Yadav S/O Ram Sevak Yadav R/O Village- Shivpur, P.S.- Karghar, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Ranjan Kumar Aged about 37 years S/o Rang Bahadur singh VillSemaridev , P.s.- Karaghar , District- Rohtas ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Manish Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 342 and 384 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per complaint case, on 19.01.2021, when complainant was on his way to civil court, all the accused persons, including this petitioner, forcibly took him in a vehicle and demanded Rs. 16,00,000/- as extortion and took his signature on plain paper. It is further alleged that on 13.2.2021, when complainant was going to deposit cheque in Sri Finance, the accused persons snatched away the same. Again on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57043 of 2025(4) dt.16-01-2026 2/3 05.12.2021, the accused persons entered the house of complainant and assaulted him and his family members and took away Rs. 50,000/-.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. As a matter of fact, the complainant took loan of Rs. 8 lacs from the petitioner for purchasing land on assurance that he would return entire money after six months but the same was no returned to the petitioner. On repeated demands, complainant issued cheque in the name of petitioner but the same was dishonoured due to insufficiency of fund for which petitioner filed a Complaint Case No. 785 of 2023 and in order to create defence in the aforesaid case this false and concocted case has been lodged. Moreover, the present complaint case has been lodged after inordinate delay of about one year which itself raises doubt over veracity of the prosecution case. It is further submitted that co-accused Anish Kumar, having similar and identical allegations, has already been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 02.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 57209 of 2025. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57043 of 2025(4) dt.16-01-2026 3/3 opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, claim based on parity and clean antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed.
7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Complaint Case No. 862 of 2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T