Vinod Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12283 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2020 Thana- DULHIN BAZAR District- Patna ====================================================== VINOD YADAV SON OF SANJEEWAN YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SARKUNA, P.S- DULHIN BAZAR, DISTRICT- PATNA ... ... PETITIONER/S

VERSUS

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 06-04-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in connection with Dulhinbazar P.S. Case no. 112 of 2020 registered under sections 302, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. As per allegation in the FIR, the 15 named accused persons including the petitioner herein came variously armed. It is stated that co-accused Sujit Kumar, Nitish Kumar, Gajendra Yadav and Mukesh Yadav surrounded the informant's brother and shot him dead. On hearing the sound of firing, the informant saw the accused persons and identified them.

Besides the said accused, the informant states that he show 11 other accused persons including the petitioner herein variously armed. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in the case. The allegation of overt act even as per the FIR is not on the petitioner. He is in custody since 10.10.2020 and has no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12283 of 2021(2) dt.06-04-2021 2/2 case stands on a similar footing to a number of other accused who have been enlarged on bail vide order dated 11.2.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. no. 31642 of 2020 and order dated 16.3.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. no. 33433 of 2020. The application for bail is opposed by learned counsel for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegations, the period in custody and grant of bail to the other co-accused, the Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Dulhinbazar P.S. Case no. 112 of 2020 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Danapur, Patna.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Prakash/- U