Partly allowed

Sitaram Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Jan 2023CR. MISC./50166/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order deals with two anticipatory bail applications under Section 438 CrPC. One petition seeking anticipatory bail in connection with offences under various sections of the IPC including 307 and 120B was dismissed as infructuous since the applicant was already arrested. The other petition was allowed with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as infructuous for Sitaram Yadav (already arrested). Anticipatory bail allowed for other petitioners subject to Rs. 20,000 bail bond and sureties with six weeks for arrest/surrender

Sitaram Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50166 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2022 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya

¶3

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

¶4

1. SITARAM YADAV Son of Late Hulas Yadav R/V- Rajaundha, P.SMohanpur, Dist- Gaya

¶5

Ranjay Yadav @ Ranjay Kumar yadav @ Ranjay Kumar @ Ranjan Yadav Son of Late Hulas Yadav R/V- Rajaundha, P.S- Mohanpur, Dist- Gaya

¶6

Amit Kumar @ Amit Yadav Son of Sitaram Yadav R/V- Rajaundha, P.SMohanpur, Dist- Gaya

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶11

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

¶12

with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 53188 of 2022

¶13

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2022 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya

¶14

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

¶15

1. MITHU YADAV Son of Panchu Yadav R/o vill.- Rajaundha, P.S.Mohanpur, Dist.- Gaya.

¶16

1. Raju Kumar Son of Mithu Yadav R/o vill.- Rajaundha, P.S.- Mohanpur, Dist.- Gaya.

¶17

Mukesh Kumar @ Nudur Yadav Son of Mithu Yadav R/o vill.- Rajaundha, P.S.- Mohanpur, Dist.- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 50166 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Varun Kumar Trivedi For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kalyan Shankar (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 53188 of 2022) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Varun Kumar Trivedi For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Nath Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶18

... ... Petitioner/s

¶19

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

4 16-01-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50166 of 2022(4) dt.16-01-2023 2/3

¶23

remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioners Sitaram Yadav and Ranjay Yadav have already been arrested by the police during the pendency of this application.

¶26

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed as infructuous.

¶27

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable u/s 147, 149, 341, 342, 323, 307, 379, 427, 506 , 353 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶28

As per prosecution case, the petitioners along with the co-accused persons and 30-40 unknown persons stopped the police vehicle and started abusing. On being objected, they started shouting slogans against the police and damaged the Government vehicle. They also pelted stones due to which the police personnel sustained head injuries and one guard became unconscious. The accused persons also tried to snatch the arms of the police personnel and began to plan to burn the police vehicle but somehow the police personnel escaped.

¶29

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50166 of 2022(4) dt.16-01-2023 3/3

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated in para 15 of the bail petition. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners. Other co-accused person has already been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 07.11.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 39596 of 2022.

¶31

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

¶32

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Sherghati (Gaya) in connection with Barahchatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 179 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶33

This application stands allowed.

¶34

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶35

atul/-

¶36

U T

Sitaram Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sitaram 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

Anil Rai @ Nokha @ Anil Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Rai Vs the State of Bihar

Punkaj Kumar Ram @ Pankaj Kumar Ram Vs the State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar @ Pappu @ Vikash Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Shiv Kumar Yadav @ Shiv Kumar Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Madheshwar Prasad @ Madheshwar Mahto Vs The State of Bihar