Nanhak Yadav And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.58008 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-221 Year-2014 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ======================================================

1. Nanhak Yadav Son of Chandar Yadav @ Chandra Prasad

2. Vinod Yadav Son of Chandar Yadav @ Chandar Prasad Both resident of Village - Gulabi (Daulatpur), P.S. - Atri, District - Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sheikh Arkan Ahmad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Humayou Ahmad Khan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 324, 326, 307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The prosecution case, in short, is that while the informant along with his father reached a place after watering the field, the accused persons, variously armed, caught and fired on his father causing his death.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.58008 of 2018(3) dt.03-12-2018 2/2 petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. The general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioners. No specific overt act or injury has attributed to the petitioners.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R./complaint case. It has been alleged that the petitioners had taken the deceased forcibly. As far as the allegation of firing is concerned, the same is alleged against the petitioners.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The prayer is rejected. If the petitioners surrender and pray for bail in the Court below, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. (Sudhir Singh, J) Pankaj/- U T