Baleshwar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.723 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-258 Year-2024 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj ====================================================== 1.

Baleshwar Yadav S/o Late Sukhari Yadav Resident of village- Bhaisahi, PSManjhagarh, District- Gopalganj 2.

Sanehi Devi W/o Baleshwar Yadav Resident of village- Bhaisahi, PSManjhagarh, District- Gopalganj 3.

Brijkishor Yadav S/o Baleshwar Yadav Resident of village- Bhaisahi, PSManjhagarh, District- Gopalganj 4.

Mukesh Yadav @ Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Kumar Yadav S/o Baleshwar Yadav Resident of village- Bhaisahi, PS- Manjhagarh, District- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pankaj Kumar Dubey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bharat Lal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner no. 1 and 3 assaulted the informant with sword causing him grievous injury, whereas petitioner no.2 and 4 assaulted wife of the informant with lathi.

4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that these petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case due to previous ancestral land dispute. Petitioner no.1 is full brother of the informant. Present case is counter blast of Complaint Case No. 2185/2024 filed by petitioner against the informant and his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.723 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2025 2/2 sons. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. He submits that injuries caused by petitioner no.1 and 3 were grievous in nature.

6. Considering the nature of injury caused by petitioner no.1 and 3, their prayer for bail is rejected.

7. In the facts of the case, prayer for bail of petitioner no. 2 and 4 is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender within eight weeks from today, let these petitioners, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate VI, Gopalganj in Manjhagarh Police Station Case No. 258 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 of the the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashi/- U T