Patna High Court
Dhananjay Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 4 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 37215 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2019 Thana- BHAGALPUR KOTWALI District-
Bhagalpur
======================================================
Dhananjay Yadav, aged about 35 years, Gender-Male, Son of Sikendra Yadav,
Resident of Village - Raipura, PS - Goradih, District - Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 04-09-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the
'APP') for the State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to file
the petition supported by affidavit latest by 7th September, 2021.
Let the same be done.
4. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with
Kotwali (Jogsar) PS Case No. 47 of 2019 dated 21.01.2019,
instituted under Sections 427/353/384 of the Indian Penal Code.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37215 of 2020 dt.04-09-2021
5. The allegation against the petitioner and others is
of creating nuisance in the office of the Zila Parishad on
15.01.2019 when a meeting for consideration of 'No Confidence
Motion' against the President was being conducted.
6. On 13.07.2021, learned counsel for the petitioner had
submitted that the allegation is false as his wife is a Zila Parishad
Member and he had taken her to the Centre for participating in the
Special Meeting, but the meeting could not proceed and the Chief
Executive Officer as well as the Vice President of the Zila
Parishad, Bhagalpur in the recorded minutes dated 15.01.2019 had
given in detail the reason why the meeting could not proceed,
which was basically due to lack of quorum. It was submitted that
in the said minutes, there is absolutely no mentioning of any
violence or incident as is alleged in the FIR which has been
lodged by the Block Development Officer, Goradih-cum-Deputed
Magistrate, Bhagalpur of the said Special Meeting. It was
contended that even the contention that from the CCTV footage,
as the FIR is against unknown, the petitioner has been identified
and thus, made accused; the same is also incorrect as there is no
footage with regard to the petitioner committing any overt act,
much less, any violent act so as to be made an accused in the case.
It was submitted that the President against whom there was 'No
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37215 of 2020 dt.04-09-2021
Confidence Motion' had taken away many members on a trip to
Nepal, deliberately to frustrate the consideration of 'No
Confidence Motion' against him and the Block Development
Officer in connivance with him had lodged the case after five days
of the occurrence, which itself indicates that it has been
done for oblique reasons.
7. In opposition, learned APP had submitted that though
there is delay in lodging of the FIR, but the same is because the
CCTV footage was being verified to identify the culprits which
took time. It was submitted that perusal of the order of the learned
Additional Sessions Judge XII, Bhagalpur dated 21.08.2020 in
ABP No. 972 of 2020, by which the prayer for pre-arrest bail of
the petitioner, along with another co-accused has been rejected,
indicates that from the photograph and the video recording it is
clear that the petitioner, along with other persons, was causing
damage in the chamber of the President of the Zila Parishad.
However, to verify the actual position, he had submitted that the
Court may call for a report from the police.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that
he was ready to cooperate in the exercise.
9. Having regard to the aforesaid stand taken by learned
counsel for the parties on 13.07.2021, the Court had directed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37215 of 2020 dt.04-09-2021
Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur for conducting an
exercise with regard to comparison of the CCTV footage of the
incident where the presence and behaviour/action of the petitioner
would be noted in his presence, with reference to such CCTV
footage. Thereafter, a report was required to be submitted.
Though, there has been delay in completion of the exercise, but
finally the same has been done on 25.08.2021.
10. In terms thereof, the Senior Superintendent of
Police, Bhagalpur has submitted a report in which the outcome of
the said exercise has also been brought on record which indicates
that the petitioner was seen coming out of the chamber of the then
Chairman along with others and after office of the Zila Parishad,
Bhagalpur being locked, the petitioner had also raised slogan
against the Chairman.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that out
of enthusiasm, he had raised slogans and his presence was due to
the fact that his wife was Member of the Zila Parishad. However,
it was submitted that no vandalism was caused.
12. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the
Court finds that by the conduct of the petitioner, when admittedly
he is the husband of the Zila Parishad Member, there was no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37215 of 2020 dt.04-09-2021
business for him to be coming out of the chamber of the Chairman
and thereafter shouting slogan. This clearly indicates that he had a
role, which was not proper and rather against the law. Thus, the
Court is not persuaded to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
13. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.
14. Interim protection granted to the petitioner under
order dated 13.07.2021, stands vacated.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)
P. Kumar
AFR/NAFR
U
T
