IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11072 of 2022

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2021 Thana- MEHANDIGANJ District- Patna

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

1.

SURESH YADAV @ SURESH GOPE, Son of Late Mangal Yadav

2.

Raju Gope, Son of Late Ramashish Yadav

3.

Munna Yadav, Son of Late Ramashish Yadav

4.

Misi Yadav @ Manish Kumar, Son of Surendra Yadav

All are Residents of Village - Ranipur Khirki, P.S. - Mehdiganj,

Distt.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, A.P.P.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA

ORAL ORDER

2

06-07-2022

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

petitioner no. 1 has been arrested during the pendency of

anticipatory bail application, as such, seeks permission to

withdraw the prayer for anticipatory bail against him.

Permission is accorded.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners no. 2 to 4

and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners no. 2 to 4 apprehend their arrest in a

case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323,

341, 420, 307, 504, 379, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code read

with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioners no. 2 to 4 submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11072 of 2022(2) dt.06-07-2022

2/4

that petitioner no. 2 and 3 are persons with clean antecedent and

petitioner no. 4 has antecedent of one case.

The informant alleges that his father had given a sum

of Rs.11,35,000/- to Darbari Gope, Surendra Gope, Suresh

Yadav, Raju Gope and Munna Yadav for purchasing a land at

Mauza Ranipur. It is alleged that his father died on 23.10.2020.

Thereafter, the informant requested the petitioners to execute the

sale deed with respect to the land in question for which the

payment was made, they refused. It is next alleged that on

15.11.2021, the informant went to the house of the petitioners

where he was abused and Prakash Yadav and Mishi Kumar fired

at him from a pistol but he managed to escape and thereafter

Surendra Yadav and Raju Gope threatened him and even

snatched Rs.10,000/- from his pocket and a gold chain.

Learned counsel for the petitioners no. 2 to 4 submits

that petitioners no. 2 to 4 have been falsely implicated in the

present case. The FIR does not even disclose that when the said

payment of Rs.11,35,000/- was made. It is next submitted that

the name of the witnesses are not given in the FIR in whose

presence the said amount was given. It is next submitted that if

what has been alleged in the FIR is true then the informant has

his remedy available in law for seeking the relief by filing a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11072 of 2022(2) dt.06-07-2022

3/4

civil case under the Specific Performance Act. It is next

submitted that criminal cases are not made to settle the civil

dispute. It is next submitted that the informant very wisely has

tried to falsely implicate the petitioners no. 2 to 4 by alleging

that they reached at his home, two of the accused fired at him

but he managed to escape. Learned counsel submits that neither

any firing was made nor any empty cartridges were recovered

from the place of occurrence. The informant only to give a

serious colour to the case has alleged that they fired and he

managed to escape. It is next submitted that as far as snatching

of money and gold chain are concerned, the allegations are

ornamental in nature.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

Considering the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the petitioners no. 2 to 4, the petitioners no. 2 to 4

above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the

learned Court bel