Prem Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75834 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2023 Thana- DHANGAI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

PREM YADAV SON OF RAMESH YADAV @ RAMESHWAR YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - KATHAUTIYA, POLICE STATION - DHANGAI, DISTRICT - GAYA 2.

PRADEEP YADAV @ PRADEEP KUMAR SON OF RAMESH YADAV @ RAMESHWAR YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - KATHAUTIYA, POLICE STATION - DHANGAI, DISTRICT - GAYA 3.

RAMESH YADAV @ RAMESHWAR YADAV SON OF BISHUN YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - KATHAUTIYA, POLICE STATION - DHANGAI, DISTRICT - GAYA 4.

RAMBRIKCH KUMAR YADAV @ RAMBRIKSH YADAV SON OF JAGDISH YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - KATHAUTIYA, POLICE STATION - DHANGAI, DISTRICT - GAYA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shrinath Manjhi, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 05-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Dhangai P.S. Case No.36 of 2023, registered for the offence punishable u/s 341/323/354(b)/379/452/504/506/34 IPC. 3.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this application with regard to petitioner no.2, who has been apprehended by the police during pendency of this application.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75834 of 2023(2) dt.05-12-2023 2/3 4.

Permission is granted.

5.

Accordingly, this application with regard to petitioner no.2 is dismissed as withdrawn and now it is being heard for consideration of anticipatory bail of petitioner nos.1, 3 and 4. 6.

Allegedly, the petitioner and other co-accused persons entered into the house of the victim and on the instigation of petitioner no.3, petitioner no.1 outraged her modesty. When the daughter of the informant came there, Pradeep Yadav outraged her modesty.

7.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have not committed any offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged has ever taken place. It is submitted that the parties are agnates and they have compromised the matter. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

8.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that there is specific allegation against the petitioners and the victim has supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. 9.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since the victim has supported the prosecution case, I am not inclined

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75834 of 2023(2) dt.05-12-2023 3/3 to enlarge the petitioner nos.1, 3 and 4 on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on their behalf is hereby rejected. 10.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T