Pintu Yadav @ Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70110 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2021 Thana- KUMAR KHAND District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.
Pintu Yadav @ Pintu Kumar Son Of Late Bhupendra Yadav Resident Of Village - Sihpur, P.S. - Kumarkhand, District - Madhepura 2.
Sushant Kumar @ Gunsagar @ Gunsagar Kumar Son Of Late Bhumeshwar Yadav Resident Of Village - Godhiya, P.S. - Kumarkhand, District - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Praveen Kumar Agrawal For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 03-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 354, 379, 504/34, 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case in nutshell is that a land dispute is going on between the informant and the petitioners. It is alleged that petitioner, namely, Pintu Yadav came and started abusing the informant and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70110 of 2023(2) dt.03-11-2023 2/3 threatened her of dire consequences if she construct house on the disputed land. Petitioner, namely, Pintu Kumar gave khanti blow due to which informant sustained injury over her right leg. It is further alleged that co-accused persons came at the door of informant and started abusing. Co-accused Prashant Kumar assaulted informant's husband with iron rod due to which he sustained injury over his chest and succumbed to injuries during the course of treatment.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and they have committed no offence. They have falsely been implicated in the present case in the background of land dispute. There is an inordinate delay of 4 days in lodging the F.I.R. The petitioners are not the assailant of deceased. Moreover, the petitioners are languishing in judicial custody since 01.08.2023. Similarly situated several co-accused persons have been granted Bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. (annexed as Annexure
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70110 of 2023(2) dt.03-11-2023 3/3 4)
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for Bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Kumarkhand P.S. Case No. 34 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M. II, Madhepura.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Nirajkrs/- U T