Rajendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56781 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2019 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Rajendra Yadav, Son of Chamari Yadav, Resident of Village- Balapar, P.S.- Muffasil, Dist.- Gaya.

2.

Mukesh Yadav, Son of Kaila Yadav, Resident of Village- Pant Nagar, P.S.- Vishnupad, District- Gaya.

3.

Dhananjay Yadav, Son of Nandlal Yadav, Resident of Village- Korma, P.S.- Tankuppa, District- Gaya.

4.

Bablu Yadav, Son of Raj Kumar Yadav, Resident of Village- Chiraiya Tand, P.S.- Rampur, Dist- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vibhakar Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 20-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for State.

The petitioners in this case are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No.151 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 341, 323, 307, 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case as nothing has been recovered from their conscious possession. Learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56781 of 2019(3) dt.20-11-2019 2/3 counsel submits that there is general and omnibus allegations against all the petitioners.

Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case wherein the specific allegation of causing assault with the butt of the pistol to the informant causing head injury to him are specifically made against Dhananjay Yadav and Bablu Yadav who are petitioner nos.3 and 4 respectively in the present case, their prayer for anticipatory bail is refused. In case the petitioner nos.3 and 4 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 on its own merit.

So far as petitioner nos.1 and 2 are concerned, since there is no specific allegation of assault against them, let the petitioner nos.1 and 2 in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (fifteen thousand ) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Gaya in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.151 of 2019, subject to the condition as laid down under

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56781 of 2019(3) dt.20-11-2019 3/3 Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. i.e.

(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U T