Partly allowed

Dharmendra Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC7 Sept 2021CR. MISC./34702/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court accorded permission to withdraw the application from petitioner no. 3 who was in judicial custody. It granted anticipatory bail to petitioner nos. 1 and 2 in a case regarding assault and intentional injury under IPC, subject to filing bonds and surrendering within specified periods.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw application from petitioner no. 3; anticipated bail granted to petitioners 1 and 2 subject to conditions of bonds and surrender.

Dharmendra Yadav Vs the State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34702 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2020 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Dharmendra Yadav Son Of Narsingh Yadav @ Narsign Yadav R/O VillageBilarua, P.S.- Bhorey, Dist.- Gopalganj

¶5

Yogendra Yadav Son Of Narsingh Yadav @ Narsign Yadav R/O VillageBilarua, P.S.- Bhorey, Dist.- Gopalganj

¶6

Narsingh Yadav @ Narsign Yadav Son Of Late Mahabir Chaudhary R/O Village- Bilarua, P.S.- Bhorey, Dist.- Gopalganj

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Lokesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. C. Jawahar,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 07-09-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶13

APP for the State through virtual mode.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of the Court to withdraw this application in respect of petitioner no. 3 as he has been taken into judicial custody.

¶15

Permission is accorded.

¶16

The application is dismissed as withdrawn in respect

¶17

of petitioner no. 3.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the Office, within a period of four weeks after restoration of normalcy.

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34702 of 2021(2) dt.07-09-2021 2/3

¶20

The petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

The prosecution allegation, in short, is that while the informant was at his door, the accused persons came and started abusing him. When the informant forbade, he was assaulted by them due to which he sustained injury. The family members came in rescue were also assaulted.

¶22

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 that they have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner nos. 1 and 2. The petitioner nos. 1 and 2 have falsely been implicated in the present case. There is a case and counter case between the parties. A free fight is alleged to have taken place. The injury on the accused side has not been explained by the prosecution. The prosecution has not come with clean hands.

¶23

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are named in the F.I.R.

¶24

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34702 of 2021(2) dt.07-09-2021 3/3

¶26

their personal bonds to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj in connection with Bhorey P.S. Case No. 283 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶27

Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 shall furnish bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶28

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶29

Pankaj/-

¶30

U T

Dharmendra Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yugal Kishore Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Manhaj @ Md. Minaj @ Menhaj Vs The State of Bihar

Chandrawati Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Rajiv Ranjan Singh @ Raju Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sudhir Sahni Vs the State of Bihar

Prince Kumar @ Prince Jaiswal Vs The State of Bihar