Petitioner sought anticipatory bail facing assault and ransom charges with multiple pending cases. The court held it was not a fit case. Prayer dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36338 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2019 Thana- KOTWA District- East Champaran
======================================================
SANJAY YADAV @ SANJAY KUMAR YADAV Son of Rudal Yadav Resident of Village- Majuraha, P.S.- Turkauliya (Raghunathpur O.P.), DistrictEast Champaran. At Present resident of Village- Bhopatpur, P.S.- Kotwa (Bhopatpur O.P.), District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Shankar Shrivastava For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lalan Kumar ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER
3 26-06-2019
Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the
State.
Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Kotwa (Bhopatpur O.P.) P.s. Case 54 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under sections 341, 323, 504, 379, 506, 384/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to previous enmity and political rivalry merely because he is husband of the present Mukhiya of the Panchayat.
Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is specific
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36338 of 2019(3) dt.26-06-2019 2/2
allegation of assault and demand of ransom against this petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner is also accused in several other cases. He, therefore, submits that the petitioner does not deserve to be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Considering the nature of allegations levelled, the materials available on record and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is, therefore, rejected.
(Arvind Srivastava, J)
mcv/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in a case involving sections 341, 323, 504, 379, 506, and 384/34 IPC.
Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar Yadav
The State of Bihar
Arvind Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
