Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76580 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-416 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Yadav S/O Ajay Yadav R/O Village- Kandi (Bithosharif), P.S- Chandauli (Buniyadganj), Dist.- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sheikh Arkan Ahmad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-12-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 109, 117(2), 74, 303(2), 351(2) and 352 of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that on 30.10.2024, the petitioner came in the night in a drunken condition and abused, thereafter on 31.10.2024 the petitioner along with five named accused persons again came and petitioner assaulted the informant repeatedly by an iron rod causing injury on his head. Further, the accused persons also assaulted his brother, bhabhi and mother causing injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76580 of 2025(2) dt.01-12-2025 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that from side of the petitioner Chandauti P.S. Case No. 298 of 2024 was instituted against the informant and his side. It is next submitted that it does not appear probable that the petitioner along with five named accused persons would have come on 31.10.2024 to commit the occurrence when it is alleged that on 30.10.2024, the petitioner had come in a drunken condition. It is also submitted that no motive for the occurrence is assigned in the FIR.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and from perusal of the order impugned, it would manifest that the informant received three injuries out of which, two injuries were on head and the third injury was pain and swelling in left hand and the injuries have been opined to be grievous in nature. It is further submitted that since the informant has received two injuries on head that amply demonstrates that the blow was repeated. It is next submitted that investigation of the case is in its nascent stages and if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76580 of 2025(2) dt.01-12-2025 3/3 A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 416 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya/Successor Court.
7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T