Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 3]

Patna High Court - Orders

Ram Sevak Yadav & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 16 May, 2014

Author: Prabhat Kumar Jha

Bench: Prabhat Kumar Jha

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 Criminal Miscellaneous No.21853 of 2014
                 ======================================================
                 1. Ram Sevak Yadav, son of Late Ram Kishun Yadav,
                 2. Dinesh Yadav, son of Late Ram Kishun Yadav,
                 3. Fulo Yadav @ Phul Kumar Yadav, son of Late Jaikant Yadav,
                    All resident of Village - Shreepur Behta, P.S. - Manigachi, Distt.
                    Darbhanga
                                                                     .... .... Petitioners
                                                  Versus
                 1. The State of Bihar
                 2. Narayan Yadav, son of Bachai Yadav, resident of Village - Nirmala,
                    P.S. Lakhnaur, District - Madhubani
                                                               .... .... Opposite Parties.
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance:
                 For the Petitioner/s       :   Mr. Binay Kumar, Advocate.
                 For the Opposite Party/s   :   Mr. A.P.P.
                 ==========================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA

                 ORAL ORDER

2   16-05-2014

Heard both sides.

The petitioners, namely, Ram Sevak Yadav, Dinesh Yadav, Fulo Yadav @ Phul Kumar Yadav are apprehending their arrest in Manigachi P.S. Case No. 7/14 registered under Sections 304(B), 120(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are villagers. No allegation of demand of dowry and torture is made against the petitioners. Petitioners have no concern with the family affairs of the husband of the deceased. The only allegation made against the petitioners that they helped the family members of the deceased in causing disappearance of Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21853 of 2014 (2) dt.16-05-2014 2/2 the victim. This allegation is also on the basis of hearsay evidence. Hence, the petitioners be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

From perusal of the F.I.R. itself, it appears that the petitioners are not family members of the in-laws of the deceased. The petitioners are only alleged to have helped in causing disappearance of the dead body of the deceased.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I feel inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petition is allowed.

Let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in Manaigachi P.S. Case No. 7/14, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Dilip/-