Dismissed¶24

Ajay Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Oct 2024CR. APP (SJ)/1405/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail — second application — maintainability — grounds not a subsequent development — first application withdrawn 22.10.2016 — co-accused bail orders dt. 11.01.2013 and 30.10.2013 — SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 S.3(i)(x)(xi)(xv) — IPC Ss.147/148/149/341/323/504/506/447 — SC/ST PS Case No.26/2009, Gaya — Patna High Court — Anil Kumar Sinha, J. — appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The second anticipatory bail application is not maintainable because the grounds raised cannot be said to be subsequent development: the two orders granting anticipatory bail to some co-accused were already available to the appellants when they withdrew the first anticipatory bail application on 22.10.2016. ¶23

Ajay Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1405 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2009 Thana- SC/ST District- Gaya

¶3

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

¶4

Ajay Yadav SON OF Ram Prasad Yadav RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- WEST AMARPURA, PS- RAFIGANJ, DIST- AURANGABAD

¶5

DHANANJAY YADAV @ DHANJU YADAV SON OF RAM PRASAD YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- WEST AMARPURA, PSRAFIGANJ, DIST- AURANGABAD

¶6

SHAKALDEEP YADAV SON OF BRAHAMDEO YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- WEST AMARPURA, PS- RAFIGANJ, DIST- AURANGABAD

¶7

UPENDRA YADAV SON OF LATE DEV NARAYAN YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- WEST AMARPURA, PS- RAFIGANJ, DISTAURANGABAD

¶8

... ... Appellant/s

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Bihar

¶11

SONKALIYA DEVI WIFE OF BINOD PASWAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- WEST AMARPURA, PS- RAFIGANJ, DIST- AURANGABAD

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shailesh Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶14

7 18-10-2024 1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

This appeal, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of SC/ST Police Station Case No. 26 of 2009, dated 19.05.2009, registered under Sections 147/148/149/341/323/504/506/447 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (i) (x) (xi) (xv) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

¶16

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1405 of 2024(7) dt.18-10-2024 2/3

¶17

Act, 1989.

¶18

This is the second attempt on behalf of the appellants for grant of anticipatory bail inasmuch as earlier anticipatory bail application of the appellants was permitted to be withdrawn, vide order, dated 22.10.2016, passed in Criminal Appeal (1^st Additional Sessions Judge -cumSpecial Judge, SC/ST,) No. 740 of 2016, on the prayer of learned Counsel for the appellants that he will be filing appropriate application against the order taking cognizance.

¶19

Learned Counsel for the appellants has moved this appeal for anticipatory bail for the second time after a lapse of about eight years on the ground that some of the accused persons were granted anticipatory bail by different bench of this Court, vide orders, dated 11.01.2013 (Criminal Misc. No. 45704 of 2012) and 30.10.2013 (Criminal Misc. No. 30375 of 2013).

¶20

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the ground raised by the appellants for maintaining this second anticipatory bail application was very much available to them at the time of withdrawal of

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1405 of 2024(7) dt.18-10-2024 3/3

¶22

the first anticipatory bail application, as such, this anticipatory bail application is not maintainable.

¶23

Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the grounds raised by the appellants cannot be said to be subsequent development inasmuch as on the date of withdrawal of the first anticipatory bail application by the appellants before this Court on 22.10.2016, these two orders were already available to the appellants, this second anticipatory bail application is not maintainable.

¶24

This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶25

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)

¶26

Prabhakar Anand/-

¶27

U √ T √

Ajay Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep Chaudhary @ Sandeep Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Vindyavasini Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Tinku @ Bhutta Vs The State of Bihar

Surendra Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Shailendar Paswan @ Shalendra Mohan Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Shyama Kumari Vs The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar