Patna High CourtCR. MISC./22244/2017dismissed

Amarjeet Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-10Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.22244 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -144 Year- 2013 Thana -ALOULI District- KHAGARIA ====================================================== Amarjeet Yadav, son of Rudal Yadav resident of village - Alauli, P.S. Alauli, District Khagaria.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satish Chandra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 10-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

This is an application for bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 42(A) of 2015, arising out of Alauli P.S.Case No. 144 of 2013 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. Allegation against the petitioner and other accused persons is of firing causing death of the deceased. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that similarly situated co-accused has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.Misc.No. 23731 of 2015, vide order dated 29.7.2015.

Heard learned APP also, who has opposed the prayer for bail stating that there is allegation against the petitioner and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22244 of 2017 (6) dt.10-07-2017 2/2 other co-accused of firing and there are five injuries on the person of deceased.

Having heard both sides and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also considering the fact that prayer for bail of co-accused has earlier been rejected and he was released after framing of charge, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner as there is direct allegation of firing against him apart from that the case is of the year 2013 and petitioner surrender in 2017.

However, as the charge has been framed in this case, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner. With the above observation, this application is disposed of.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U