← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./38284/2014rejected

Ravindra Kumar Yadav @ Ravindra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2015-03-20Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38284 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -96 Year- 2014 Thana -ANDER District- SIWAN ====================================================== Ravindra Kumar Yadav @ Ravindra Yadav Son of Uma Shankar Yadav Village- Khembhatkan, P.S.- Andar, District- Siwan .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 20-03-2015 Heard the parties.

The petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Andar P.S. Case No. 96 of 2014 instituted under section 307 and other allied sections of the Penal Code has sought anticipatory bail.

It is submitted that on account of land dispute the occurrence took place as has been admitted in the FIR itself. There is a counter version of the case lodged by one of the accuseds. The petitioner is the earning member of the family and carries no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP opposed the prayer contending that the order of the learned Sessions Judge records the injury sustained by the informant which, accordingly to the FIR, is attributed to the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38284 of 2014 (2) dt.20-03-2015 2 / 2 petitioner. It appears that as many as three persons received injury. Specific allegation against the petitioner is that he inflicted injury by Farsa on the head of the informant. The doctor has found the injury on the right upper parietal of scalp. Considering the nature of injury he was referred to the Sadar Hospital. Having regard to the allegation attributed to the petitioner and the facts evidencing from the impugned order this Court is not satisfied that he be privileged with the anticipatory bail. Prayer for bail is rejected.

The petitioner should surrender and seek regular bail. In case he does so, the court below shall consider his bail application and dispose of the same on its own merit uninfluenced by the present order.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) HR/- U