Ajay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11939 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-581 Year-2023 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Ajay Yadav, aged about 27 years (Male) S/O Late Sonarik Yadav, R/O Village- Ledhu, Post- Jantar, P.S.- Jori, District- Chatra (Jharkhand) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 05-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 581 of 2023 registered for an offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 436, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, the informant's son-inlaw came into her house thereafter all the accused persons started abusing and assaulting her daughter and Natni and when the informant raised objection, all the accused persons tried to set her on fire.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. He submits that petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence. Petitioner has got clean antecedent as stated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11939 of 2024(2) dt.05-03-2024 2/2 para-3 of the petition and he is in custody since 18.06.2023.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. From perusal of the first information report and impugned order dated 10.01.2023, it appears that there is specific allegation against the petitioner for setting her on fire. It further appears that there is clear cut allegation against the petitioner that he went to Sasural and assaulted his wife and daughter without any reason and tried them to set on fire and as per paras-6, 7 and 8 of the case diary, the statement of the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution, in these circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

8. However, the trial Court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and if the trial is not concluded within the said period, the petitioner shall renew his prayer for bail and the trial Court shall grant bail to the petitioner. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T