Chhatri Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57259 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
Chhatri Yadav Son of Late Mishri Yadav Resident Of Village -Farreh, PsChautham, Dist -Khagaria 2.
Pabho Yadav @ Pamo Yadav son of Late Achambhi Yadav Resident Of Village -Farreh, Ps- Chautham, Dist -Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Jai Kishor Poddar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 27-08-2025 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners, learned Advocate for the State and the learned Advocate for the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No.119 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Allegedly, while the informant along with his wife were coming on a motorcycle, in the meanwhile, all the accused persons, including the petitioners surrounded them and started hurling abuse. On objection, they assaulted the wife of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57259 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 2/3 informant and snatched her golden chain. There is allegation of firing upon the informant and his wife against co-accused Dhanni Yadav, Santu Yadav and Fantush Yadav.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that from the narrations made in the FIR, it is evident that the allegation of firing is made against three named accused persons, who are not before this Court. So far the petitioners are concerned, save and except, they being a member of the group, no specific allegation of any overt act has been levelled. In fact, the present case is nothing but a counter blast of Chautham P.S. Case No.118 of 2025 instituted against the informant and other persons by one of the co-accused persons. It is the admitted position that in the occurrence, none has sustained any injury.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State and the learned Advocate for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioners bear three criminal antecedent each in their credit and they are in the habit of assaulting and intimidating the informant and his family members.
6. Having considered the submissions set forth by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the factum of case and counter case, coupled with the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57259 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 3/3 submission that none has sustained any injury, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Khagaria in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No.119 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.
(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U T