Ambuj Yadav @ Ramanand Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76533 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2017 Thana- ALOULI District- Khagaria ====================================================== AMBUJ YADAV @ RAMANAND YADAV, son of Bhuneshwar Yadav, Resident of village-Raun Bartar, P.S. Alauli, District-Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jai Kishor Poddar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 13-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence under sections 120B, 379, 380, 384, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per allegation in the F.I.R., the accused persons along with petitioner herein are said to have demanded a sum of Rs. 1 lac from the informant and on the informant having denied the same, on the point of pistol, the petitioner took away the valuable worth Rs.10,000/-.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is enmity between the parties. Prior to the said

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76533 of 2019(2) dt.13-02-2020 2/2 occurrence, the father of the petitioner had lodged a case in the year 2016 against the informant and because of the said case, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is further submitted that charge sheet has already been submitted in the case and the investigation has been closed. The application for bail has been opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the above stated facts and circumstances of the case, specially that the case in which the prayer for anticipatory bail has been made is of the year January, 2017, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail and as such the application for anticipatory bail is rejected.

The petitioner is directed to surrender in the court below within six weeks. However, in case the petitioner surrenders within the aforesaid time, the Court below shall consider the application for bail without being prejudiced by this order of rejection.

(Partha Sarthy, J.) amit/- U T