Ram Prakash Yadav @ Ram Pravesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 10233 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 12650 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP ======================================================

¶20

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

3 16-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶23

A.P.P. for the State.

¶24

The petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No.185 of 2023 lodged under Sections 302, 385 and 506 of the I.P.C. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶25

As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against the nine named accused persons including the

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10233 of 2024(3) dt.16-04-2024 2/3

¶27

petitioners. The specific allegation of gun shot is against the accused namely, Rakesh Yadav and Neeraj Yadav and the order giver, is Ram Pravesh Yadav.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. He submits that from the contents of F.I.R., it become crystal clear that the allegation of act and overt act are upon only three accused persons, namely, Ram Pravesh Yadav, Rakesh Yadav and Neeraj Yadav and against rest accused persons, there is absolutely no whisper against them.

¶29

Counsel further submits that from the contents of F.I.R., it become crystal clear that the cause of dispute is agricultural land and there is neither act and overt act against the present petitioners of both the cases.

¶30

Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in custody since 02.12.2023 having two criminal antecedent of petitioner No.1 (Anil Yadav) in which he is on bail and the petitioner No.2 (Manish Yadav) has clean antecedent and the petitioner (Ram Prakash Yadav) of second case, has one criminal case in which he is on bail.

¶31

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioners are member of mob and

¶32

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10233 of 2024(3) dt.16-04-2024 3/3

¶33

have committed offence in connivance with each other.

¶34

In the present facts and circumstances of this case

¶35

and the submissions made above, let the petitioners of both the cases above named, be granted bail, but only after framing of charge, if not framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/(Rupees Thirty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Munger in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No.185 of 2023, subject to the following conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

¶36

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

¶37

Prakashmani/-

Ram Prakash Yadav @ Ram Pravesh Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Prakash Yadav @ Ram Pravesh Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahangi Devi Vs Babban Prasad

Bikesh Kumar Singh Vs the Union of India

Mukesh Kumar and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dhananjay Mandal @ Naresh Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Bhullu Nishad @ Bhullu Singh Nishad Vs The State of Bihar

Sonu Ansari Vs The State of Bihar