Sadanand Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56601 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2019 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1.

SADANAND YADAV Son of Umesh Yadav @ Bauki Yadav Resident of Village-Fatehpur, Police Station- Jagdishpur, District- Bhagalpur. 2.

Sonu Yadav Son of Umesh Yadav @ Bauki Yadav Resident of VillageFatehpur, Police Station Jagdishpur, District- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Shanker Pankaj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Shaheen Begum, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 20-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioners are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 100 of 2019 registered under Sections 302/379/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of Learned C.J.M., Bhagalpur. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that these petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that no allegation of assault or firing against the petitioner and have no criminal antecedent.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners by saying that these two petitioners had participated in the alleged occurrence and had

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56601 of 2019(3) dt.20-11-2019 2/2 caught hold of the deceased who was shot at by one Bihari Yadav.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case wherein it is alleged that these two petitioners had participated in the alleged occurrence and had caught hold of the deceased who was shot at by one Bihari Yadav and taking note of the fact that there are allegations of active participation against these petitioners in the alleged occurrence, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is refused.

In case, the petitioners surrender and pray for regular bail in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, their prayer for regular bail shall be considered by the court below on it's own merit without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U T