Dipu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5294 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-417 Year-2019 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.

Dipu Yadav, aged about 21 years, Sex-Male 2.

Binjar Yadav, aged about 24 years, Sex-Male.

Both sons of Late Jatahu Yadav @ Jatathu Yadav R/o village- Bairagi Bagh, P.S.- Jehanabad Nagar, District- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar No 13, Mr. Rohit Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 02-03-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 417 of 2019 registered for offences under sections 452, 354, 323, 307, 379, 307, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation, the accused persons entered into the house of the Informant and assaulted the inmates by different weapons such as Lathi and rod.

Specific allegation has been made against the petitioner no.1 of causing injury by rod on the head of the Informant as well as one the head of her husband and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5294 of 2020(2) dt.02-03-2020 2/3 allegation has been made against the petitioner no.2 of assaulting the son of the Informant.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no such medical report with respect to head injury caused on the head of the son of the Informant, namely, Sunil. He further submits that the doctor has kept his opinion reserved regarding nature of injury made on Shanti Devi (Informant), Gayatri Devi and Saryu Yadav but, ultimately has given the report as simple but, the fact is that all the accused persons have entered into the house of the Informant and all the family members have been pushed up causing different injuries to different inmates.

Looking to the specific allegation made against both the petitioners as also considering entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioners, above named, is rejected.

If the petitioners surrender before the court below within a period of three weeks from today and makes a prayer for bail, the court below, without being prejudiced by this order, will pass orders in accordance with law on the same day of their

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5294 of 2020(2) dt.02-03-2020 3/3 appearance before the court below.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) rishi/- U T