Shyam Sunder Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76789 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-672 Year-2023 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Shyam Sunder Yadav Son of Musafir Yadav Resident of Village - Mayapur, PS- Muffassil , District - Gaya 2.

Bindi Devi Wife of Shyam Sunder Yadav Resident of Village - Mayapur, PSMuffassil , District - Gaya 3.

Rahul Kumar @ Chintu Kumar Son of Shyam Sunder Yadav Resident of Village - Mayapur, PS- Muffassil , District - Gaya 4.

Rohit Kumar Son of Shyam Sunder Yadav Resident of Village - Mayapur, PS- Muffassil , District - Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Syed Asgher Najmi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar No. 3, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 12-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable u/s 147, 148, 341, 323, 307, 504, 506, 149 of IPC.

3.

Allegedly, all the F.I.R. named accused persons including the petitioners came to the informant and started abusing him. It is further alleged that they assaulted the informant and his family members with lathi, danda, khanti and iron rod due to which informant and his family members sustained injuries. 4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76789 of 2024(2) dt.12-11-2024 2/2 petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation leveled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Injury was found to be simple in nature. It is further submitted that there is land dispute between the parties. There is case and counter case between them. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and since there is no specific overt act attributed against the petitioners, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Muffassil P.S. Case No.672 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) priyanka/- U T