Ramchandra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78278 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-621 Year-2025 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.
Ramchandra Yadav S/o-Late Turanti Yadav Resident of village-Sahugadh Tola, Bhattu (Bhatu Tola), P.S.-Madhepura, District-Madhepura. 2.
Arvind Yadav @ Arvindra Kumar S/o-Shambhu Yadav Resident of villageSahugadh Tola- Diwani, Ward No.-12, P.S.-Madhepura, District - Madhepura.
3.
Ravin Yadav @ Robin Yadav @ Ravon Yadav S/o- Shambhu Yadav Resident of village- Sahugadh Tola- Diwani, ward no. 12, P.S.-Madhepura, District- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 621 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 115(2), 126(2), 109, 324(4), 3(5) of the B.N.S and section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, on 03.06.2025, at about 1:00 a.m., the petitioners, alongwith 20-25 unknown persons armed with lathis, dandas, and other weapons, arrived at the newly constructed house of the informant. The accused persons
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78278 of 2025(2) dt.28-11-2025 2/3 abused the informant and demolished a portion of the wall of her building. When the informant attempted to pacify the situation, the accused persons opened fire, due to which the informant managed to flee and thereby saved her life. The accused persons then threw away the construction materials, threatened the informant and demanded five lakh as rangdari (extortion money). When the police arrived at the scene, the accused persons fled.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners orally submits that there was no firing material recovered from the place of occurrence. There is land dispute between both the parties and in cases of land dispute, facts are generally exaggerated to make the offence graver. It is further submitted that from perusal of the FIR and impunged order, it appears that no one was injured in this case, therefore, no case is made out under Section 109 of the BNS and under section 27 of the Arms Act. Petitioner no. 1 having no criminal antecedent whereas petitioner nos. 2&3 bear three criminal antecedents in which they are already on bail.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that the petitioners are F.I.R. named accused and he cannot escape from the allegation made in the F.I.R.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78278 of 2025(2) dt.28-11-2025 3/3
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, no one was injured and there was no specific allegation against the petitioners, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Madhepura in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 621 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) Nilmani/- U