Pradeep Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.21867 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -6 Year- 2012 Thana -DUMARIA District- GAYA ======================================================
1. Pradeep Yadav, son of Late Ganesh Yadav, resident of Village- Kaual, Police Station- Chhatarpur Naudiaha, District- Chatra (Jharkhand). .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ajay Kumar-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 10-05-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Dumaria P.S. Case No. 06 of 2012, registered for offences punishable under Sections 144, 147, 149 of Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-B)A, 26 and 35 of Arms Act and Section 3/4 of Explosive Substance Act Section 17 of C.L.A Act. Prosecution case is that police on information that some miscreants were planning to commit any occurrence, started search operation and during search, recovered various explosive substance and other arms and ammunitions from other co-accused persons and from possession of the petitioner 5 kg. of explosive substance and other things were recovered.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that allegation of recovery from the possession of the petitioner is not true as the informant in his fardbeyan has submitted that petitioner was neither apprehended on spot nor anything was recovered from
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21867 of 2017 (2) dt.10-05-2017 2/2 his possession. It has further been submitted that petitioner's name has surfaced in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused. As regards other criminal antecedents is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in those cases also he has falsely been implicated. Heard learned A.P.P. also.
Having heard both sides, in view of the fact and circumstances of the case and also in view of the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant him the privilege of bail, his application for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it as early as possible.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T