Jagla Yadav @ Jangla Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8980 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-311 Year-2019 Thana- RAJAON District- Banka ====================================================== JAGLA YADAV @ JANGLA YADAV Son of Subhas Yadav @ Suvash Ydav Resident of Village- Khaira, P.S.- Rajoun, District- Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Angad Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Anita Kumari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 10-03-2021 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Anita Kumari Singh, the learned A.P.P. for the State. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Rajoun PS case no. 311 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 386/34 of Indian Penal Code and 27 of Arms Act.

The allegation is regarding 08 accused persons having arrived at the house of the informant, whereafter quarrel had taken place on account of dispute regarding pathway on the private land, whereupon the petitioner and one co-accused person namely Mukesh Yadav are alleged to have fired on Nityanand Yadav as also on Rajhansh Yadav.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8980 of 2020(6) dt.10-03-2021 2/2 implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that during investigation, it has been revealed that although two persons had fired gun shots, however only one injury has been sustained by the said Nityanand Yadav.

Per contra, the learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is direct allegation of firing upon the petitioner herein. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the materials available on record as also those available in the case diary, apart from the fact that the petitioner is accused in one another case, this Court finds that there are ample materials on record to show the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence, hence I do not find any merit in the present petition, hence the same stands dismissed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T