Allowed

Sintu Kumar Yadav @ Sintu Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Mar 2024CR. MISC./75768/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought anticipatory bail in a case of alleged poisoning deaths arising from a protest-cum-complaint after police submitted a final form. The court noted the informant's husband was a veteran criminal and granted anticipatory bail subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail: release on arrest/surrender within six weeks on Rs.25,000 bond each with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.

Sintu Kumar Yadav @ Sintu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72968 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-551 Year-2021 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE District- Begusarai

¶3

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

¶4

1. RAMESHWAR YADAV SON OF LATE JAGAT YADAV @ LATE RAJO YADAV R/O VILLAGE- RAJAJAN, P.S.- MANSI, DISTRICTKHAGARIA

¶5

1. DHARAMVEER YADAV SON OF LATE JAGAT YADAV @ LATE RAJO YADAV R/O VILLAGE- RAJAJAN, P.S.- MANSI, DISTRICTKHAGARIA ... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. The State of Bihar 2. BIBHA DEVI WIFE OF SRI ARJUN YADAV R/O VILLAGE- RAJAJAN, P.S.- MANSI, DISTRICT- KHAGARIA ... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 75768 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-551 Year-2021 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1. SINTU KUMAR YADAV @ SINTU YADAV S/O BHUSHAN YADAV R/O VILLAGE- RAJAJAN, P.S- MANSI, DISTT.- KHAGARIA. 2. ANIRUDH YADAV @ ANRUDH YADAV S/O LATE RAJO YADAV R/O VILLAGE- RAJAJAN, P.S- MANSI, DISTT.- KHAGARIA. 3. PANKAJ YADAV S/O LATE RAJO YADAV R/O VILLAGE- RAJAJAN, P.S- MANSI, DISTT.- KHAGARIA. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. BIBHA DEVI W/O SRI ARJUN YADAV R/O VILLAGE- RAJAJAN, P.SMANSI, DISTT.- KHAGARIA. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 72968 of 2023) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Viveka Nandsingh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kalyan Shankar, APP. Mr. Rajnish Kumar Singh, Adv. (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 75768 of 2023) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Viveka Nandsingh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madhura Nand Jha, APP. Mr. Rajnish Kumar Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

¶9

3 05-03-2024 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

¶10

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72968 of 2023(3) dt.05-03-2024 2/3

¶11

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 328/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 04.06.2019 at about 12:00 a.m., the complainant saw that three persons caught hold the complainant’s son and her two younger brothers and other three were administering poison to them, as a result, they died.

¶13

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and they have committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged ever took place. Both the parties are co-villagers. Petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is totally false and based on concocted facts. The real fact is that the husband of the informant is a veteran criminal and he has several enemies due to which his son and his brothers-in-law were killed by someone else. It is further submitted that after investigation, the police has submitted final form against the petitioners. He further submits that during the course of the investigation, the informant has filed a protest cum complaint case in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai against the

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72968 of 2023(3) dt.05-03-2024 3/3

¶15

petitioners. Thereafter, on 09.08.2023, learned Court below took cognizance against the petitioners. Petitioners have criminal antecedents as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

¶16

Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposes the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the petitioners have suppressed their criminal antecedent. Hence, they do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶17

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as the husband of the informant is a veteran criminal, let the above named petitioners, 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 lower Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 551C of 2021, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶18

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶19

divyanshi/-

¶20

U T

Sintu Kumar Yadav @ Sintu Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sintu Kumar Yadav @ Sintu 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

Sumant Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mintu Kumari Devi Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Sanjeev Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manikant Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Switi Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Rajiv Kumar Vs The State of Bihar