Dismissed

Sukar Yadav and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC10 Nov 2017CR. MISC./47349/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous matter concerning Petitioners accused of arson under Sections 427 and 34 IPC, the Court rejected the application for anticipatory bail. The Court found the allegations serious and noted the delay in the FIR filing and lack of independent eyewitnesses to the specific acts of burning food grains.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail rejected; petitioners may be arrested in connection with the case.

Sukar Yadav and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar — Property and Title | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47349 of 2017 (3) dt.10-11-2017 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.47349 of 2017

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -66 Year- 2017 Thana -TANKUPPA District- GAYA

¶4

====================================================== 1. Sukar Yadav Son of Late Mangar Yadav

¶5

Ravindra Yadav Son of Sukar Yadav Both residents of Village - Simrahi, P.S. - Tankuppa in the District of Gaya.

¶6

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar.

¶9

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance :

¶11

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Braj Nandan Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh

¶12

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶13

3 10-11-2017 Heard both sides.

¶14

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Tankuppa P.S. Case No.66 of 2017 registered under Section 436, 427 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

The informant alleged that in the night of 06.06.2017, she got up at about 11.30 after feeling heat of fire and saw that Sukar Yadav and his son were sprinkling the kerosene oil on her house which was burning. The informant further alleged that the food grains were burnt to ashes.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the occurrence took place in the night of 06.06.2017 but the informant lodged the case on 08.06.2017. There is no eyewitness

¶17

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47349 of 2017 (3) dt.10-11-2017 2

¶18

of the occurrence save and except the informant but it appears from perusal of the case diary that the witnesses rushed to the place of occurrence on alarm raised by the informant and the witnesses have stated that the informant disclosed the name of Sukar Yadav and his son that they ignited fire in her house but the witnesses denied the burning of food grains.

¶19

Considering the facts and nature of allegation against the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

¶20

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶21

Saurabh/-

¶22

U T

Sukar Yadav and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukar Yadav and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Mahto @ Manoj Kumar Mahto Vs The State Of Bihar

Pankaj Sharma Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Mahatam Sah and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Vishwanath Rai and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Binod Sah and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Vidayanand Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar