Patna High CourtCR. MISC./25108/2016rejected

Ram Bilash Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2016-08-03Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25108 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -338 Year- 2015 Thana -SAHEBPUR KAMAL District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Ram Bilash Yadav, Son of Late Bauku Yadav Resident of VillageChamman, Tola, Police Station - Sahebpur, Kamal, District Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 338 of 2015, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504 and 307 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Begusarai.

The accusation is that on 17.08.2015, Shyamdeo Yadav, son of the informant, was returning to his house after cutting the grass. In the meantime, 08 persons, including the petitioner, came armed with gun and started to abuse saying to vacate the land. When Shyamdeo Yadav made protest then on the order of Rabo Yadav, this petitioner shot fire at the son of the informant causing injury at his chest.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25108 of 2016 (4) dt.03-08-2016 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case due to land dispute. The petitioner is in custody since 23.12.2015.

Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner to shot fire at the chest of the son of the informant. In para 32 of the case diary the injury was found caused by fire arm.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner, above named, is rejected.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J.) manish/- U T