Allowed

Jai Prakash Yadav @ J.P Yadav and Others v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Aug 2022CR. MISC./3737/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, apprehending arrest in a case involving abduction, assault, and kidnapping offences, subject to bond conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted anticipatory bail on bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount, to present within four weeks before C.J.M., Supaul.

Jai Prakash Yadav @ J.P Yadav and Others Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3737 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2021 Thana- KISHUNPUR District- Supaul

¶3

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

¶4

Jai Prakash Yadav @ J.P Yadav And Others Son Of Jitu Yadav Resident Of Village - Murli, P.S.- Kishanpur, Distt.- Supaul.

¶5

Laddu Lal Yadav Son of Jitu Yadav Resident of Village - Murli, P.s.Kishanpur, Distt.- Supaul.

¶6

Matkuriya Son of Radhe Shyam Yadav Resident of Village - Murli, P.s.Kishanpur, Distt.- Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Patla Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Zainul Abedin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

¶12

3 24-08-2022 learned APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 341, 323, 380, 307, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

It is alleged that all the F.I.R named accused persons including the petitioners forcibly abducted the

¶15

minor girl of the informant and when the informant and other family members made protest, they were assaulted

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3737 of 2022(3) dt.24-08-2022 2/3

¶17

by the accused persons.

¶18

It is submitted by learned counsel for the

¶19

petitioners that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. There is counter version of the occurrence

¶20

also. Moreover, for the alleged occurrence of 17.07.2021, the F.I.R has been registered on 27.07.2021. The victim in her 164 Cr.P.C statement has recorded her age as 16 years and supported the prosecution case. However, she did not allege any complicity of the petitioners in her elopement.

¶21

Learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

¶22

In the facts and circumstance of the case, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest

¶23

or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousands)

¶24

each with two sureties of the like amount each to the

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3737 of 2022(3) dt.24-08-2022 3/3

¶26

satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in connection with Kishanpur P.S. Case No. 140 of

¶27

2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶28

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

¶29

Shageer/-

¶30

U T

Jai Prakash Yadav @ J.P Yadav and Others v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Prakash Yadav @ J.P Yadav and Others 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

Dipendra Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

Ridhi Singh @ Nidhi Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Tripurari Tiwary @ Manish Kashyap @ Tripurari Kr. Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar

Ajit Kumar Mehta Vs the State of Bihar

Dharmendra Tanti Vs the State of Bihar

Sumit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar