Prakash Yadav @ Prakash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7795 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2023 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger ====================================================== Prakash Yadav @ Prakash Kumar Son Of Anil Yadav R/O-Sitakunddih, Nath Tola, P.S.-Muffasil, Distt.-Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjiv Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-02-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 52 of 2023 dated 31.01.2023 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 341, 323, 325, 307, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act

3. The main submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in jail since 03.10.2023, as per allegation, altogether 5 accused persons, including the petitioner, fired indiscriminately at the informant which caused only one fire-arm injury on the thigh of the informant but in view of the manner of occurrence, the said allegation is completely false as only one injury was not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7795 of 2024(2) dt.19-02-2024 2/2 possible in such indiscriminate firing and moreover, the informant sustained simple injury on his thigh but the injury report issued by the Doctor concerned is also suspicious as dimention of the injury was not stated in the injjury report. Further submissions is that one co-accused namely, Dadan Kumar @ Dadan Yadav, carrying similar nature of allegation, has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate bench of this court vide order passed in Cri. Misc. No. 70190 of 2023 and in the FIR, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner.

4. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner.

5. Considering the above submissions and mainly petitioner's fair and clean antecedent, coupled with the nature of injury of the informant as opined by the Doctor concerned discussed above, this court is inclined to accept his bail prayer. Accordingly, let the petitioner named-above be enlarged on bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 52 of 2023 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

(Shailendra Singh, J) Rajiv/- U T