Patna High Court
Birbahadur Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 20 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 10934 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-319 Year-2019 Thana- NAWANAGAR District- Buxar
======================================================
1. Birbahadur Singh, aged about 20 years, Male son of Birendra Yadav.
2. Birendra Yadav, aged about 38 years, Male son of Late Bihari Yadav.
Both are resident of village- Kandsar, PS- Nawanagar (Sonbarsa), District-
Buxar.
3. Guddu Yadav, aged about 20 years, Male son of Suresh Singh, resident of
village- Bhadi, PS- Murar, District- Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 20-07-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma, learned counsel for
the petitioners and Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.
3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with
Nawanagar (Sonbarsa OP) PS Case No. 319 of 2019 dated
15.11.2019, instituted under Sections 341, 323, 353, 224, 225,
307, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
petitioner no. 1, namely, Birbahadur Singh, has surrendered before
the Court below and taken bail and, thus, he may be permitted to
withdraw the present petition on behalf of him.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10934 of 2020 dt.20-07-2021
5. In view thereof, as prayed for by learned counsel for
the petitioners, the petition on behalf of petitioner no. 1, namely,
Birbahadur Singh stands disposed off as withdrawn and is
restricted to petitioners no. 2 and 3, namely, Birendra Yadav and
Guddu Yadav, respectively.
6. The allegation against the petitioners is that when
police had gone to arrest Ashok Yadav and had taken him into
custody, they had manhandled the police personnel and had freed
the said accused.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
informant, who is the SHO of the Police Station was on inimical
terms with the petitioner no. 2, as he had falsely implicated his son
previously, showing recovery of mahua liquor from the Kirana
shop of the son of the petitioner no. 2. It was submitted that due to
this, the petitioner no. 2 had filed informatory petition before the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar on 03.07.2019
apprehending false implication by the present informant and
thereafter, the present case has been instituted.
8. Learned APP, from the case diary, submitted that the
petitioners who were known and related to Ashok Yadav, whom
the police had gone to arrest had forcibly freed him from the
custody of the police who were also manhandled and abused. It
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10934 of 2020 dt.20-07-2021
was further submitted that witnesses have supported the
prosecution case. He submitted that the conduct of the petitioners
is highhanded as the police who had gone to make an arrest of
another accused were manhandled and abused and the said
accused was set free, which has a very grave adverse effect on the
morale of the police and also the general atmosphere of the area
where such lawlessness prevails. Further, it was submitted that the
filing of the informatory petition itself shows that the same has
been done after seizure of liquor from the shop of the son of the
petitioner no. 2, only to create pressure on the police in future.
9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the
case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court
is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners no. 2 and
3, namely, Birendra Yadav and Guddu Yadav, respectively.
10. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)
P. Kumar
AFR/NAFR
U
T
