Amlesh Kumar Yadav @ Amlesh Yadav @ Amlesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17641 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-528 Year-2022 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani ====================================================== Amlesh Kumar Yadav @ Amlesh Yadav @ Amlesh Kumar, S/o- Dev Krishna Yadav @ Deo Yadav R/v- Nabtol PS- Phulparas District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Hriday Narayan Harshit, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 25-03-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Phulparas P.S. Case no.528 of 2022 registered under sections 302, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that on the orders of Kapildev Yadav, Rambhu Yadav, Raushan Yadav and the petitioner herein fired upon the husband of the informant with a pistol. He sustained firearm injury and died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The allegations against the petitioner are general and omnibus in nature and there is no specific allegation of firing upon him. No incriminating article has been recovered from the petitioner's

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17641 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026 2/2 possession and no witness has supported the prosecution case in course of investigation. The petitioner is in custody since 30.4.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

5. The prayer for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State who submits that the petitioner is one of the three assailants of the deceased against whom there is specific allegation of having fired upon the husband of the informant leading to his death. The petitioner has eight criminal antecedents.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R. wherein the petitioner along with two others are said to have fired upon the husband of the informant with their pistol leading to death of the informant's husband, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T