Suresh Gop @ Suresh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80400 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-349 Year-2025 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.
Suresh Gop @ Suresh Yadav S/o- Late Battu Yadav @ Bhattu Gop @ Bhattu Yadav Village- Charuepar, PS- Noorsarai, District- Nalanda 2.
Ajay Yadav S/o- Suresh Gop @ Suresh Yadav Village- Charuepar, PSNoorsarai, District- Nalanda 3.
Ravi Kumar @ Sonu Yadav S/o- Suresh Gop @ Suresh Yadav VillageCharuepar, PS- Noorsarai, District- Nalanda 4.
Vijay Yadav @ Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Yadav S/o- Suresh Gop @ Suresh Yadav Village- Charuepar, PS- Noorsarai, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Umesh Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Binod Kumar Mr.Raj Kishor Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-12-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 75, 76, 308(3), 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that her husband is a school teacher and accused persons since 2014 are taking extortion of Rs.5,000/-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80400 of 2025(2) dt.09-12-2025 2/3 per month. In the Year 2018, her husband objected the extortion demand when accused assaulted him for which case no.65 of 2018 was instituted. Further, her husband was not getting his salary regularly, thus was not in a position to pay the demand of extortion, as such, the accused demanded Rs.2 Lacs in one-go to which her husband objected. Further, 18.06.2025, the accused persons in absence of her husband started ploughing her field since extortion amount was not paid, as such, informant objected on which accused assaulted her and tore her blouse and snatched her chain.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that petitioners are not accused in Case No.65 of 2018. It is also submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that on account of dispute relating to land, a false case came to be instituted alleging extortion when petitioners admittedly are persons with clean antecedent. It is also submitted that no specific allegation is alleged against the petitioners.
5. Learned A.P.P. as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80400 of 2025(2) dt.09-12-2025 3/3
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Noorsarai P. S. Case No.349 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T