Patna High CourtCR. MISC./55719/2018dismissed

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

2018-09-28Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 55719 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -735 Year- 2017 Thana -BHAGALPUR KOTWALI DistrictBHAGALPUR =========================================================== Ashish Yadav @ Ashish Kumar Yadav, Son of Ashok Yadav, Resident of Village Bari Khanjarpur P.S. Barari, District- Bhagalpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in Kotwali (Tilkamanjhi) P.S. Case No. 735 of 2017 dated 11.10.2017 instituted under Sections 341/323/504/506/379/384/385/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner and others is that in the duly registered flat of the informant they had forcibly entered and besides taking away various materials had also assaulted the labourers and put their lock and key.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused party had taken the flat from the landlord whereas informant

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55719 of 2018 dt.28-09-2018 2/2 had taken the same from the builder's share and, thus, there was dispute among the parties.

5. Learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for the informant submitted that the flat is registered in the name of the informant and even earlier the accused had threatened the informant for which he had filed complaint before the DIG.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T