Partly allowed

Pramod Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Aug 2023CR. MISC./38590/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners in a case involving offenses under IPC Sections 147, 148, 323, 354, and others, subject to conditions including a bond of Rs. 25,000. However, anticipatory bail was rejected for the third petitioner due to the grievous nature of injuries sustained by the informant, directing him to surrender for regular bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to Petitioners 1 and 2 on bond of Rs. 25,000 each; Prayer for anticipatory bail of Petitioner 3 rejected, directed to surrender for regular bail.

Pramod Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38590 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2022 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada

¶3

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

¶4

PRAMOD YADAV S/O BALESHWAR YADAV R/O Village- Jethsari, P.SThali, Distt.- Nawada.

¶5

Vijay Yadav S/O Chandeshwar Yadav R/O Village- Jethsari, P.S- Thali, Distt.- Nawada.

¶6

Shailesh Yadav @ Salesh Yadav S/O Chandeshar Yadav R/O VillageJethsari, P.S- Thali, Distt.- Nawada.

¶7

... ... Petitioners.

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Bihar

¶10

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶11

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

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan

¶13

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

3 18-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

¶16

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 354, 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

All the F.I.R. named accused persons including these petitioners are said to have assaulted the family members of the informant by means of lathi and iron rod as a result they sustained injury. The reason behind the occurrence is said to be that petitioner no.1 and co-accused Bablu Yadav were peeping the daughter-in-law of the informant.

¶18

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that no

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38590 of 2023(3) dt.18-08-2023 2/3

¶20

such occurrence as alleged ever took place. Petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that both sides are neighbours and there is some dispute going on between the parties due to flowing of drainage. The petitioners’ side have also filed a case against the informant’s side being Govindpur P.S. Case No.204 of 2022 i.e. earlier to the case under hand. It is further submitted that except injury sustained by the two injured rest of the injuries are simple in nature. Petitioner no.1 have two criminal antecedents, whereas petitioner nos.2 and 3 have one criminal antecedent, as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

¶21

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the fact that the injuries inflicted by petitioner nos.1 and 2 are simple in nature, let the above named petitioner nos.1 and 2, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 205 of 2022, subject to the condition

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38590 of 2023(3) dt.18-08-2023 3/3

¶23

as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances of case as also the

¶25

fact that the injury inflicted by petitioner no.3 is grievous in nature, I am not inclined to enlarge petitioner no.3 on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner no.3 is hereby rejected. However, petitioner no.3 is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

¶26

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶27

Trivedi/-

¶28

U T

Pramod Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod 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

Shaid @ Md. Sahid @ Shahid Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Pintu Paswan @ Pintu Kumar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Daroga Rai @ Daroga Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Kumar Sinha Vs The Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna.

Rita Devi @ Sanju Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Hare Ram Yadav @ Hare Ram Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar