Lala Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20174 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2019 Thana- RAMPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== LALA YADAV Son of Ram Sharan Yadav Resident of Mohalla - Gewal Bigha, P.S. - Rampur, District - Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Navin Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 20-07-2020 This case has been heard through video conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defects as pointed out by the office within two weeks of normal functioning of the Court.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 325, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case as lodged by the informant is that when she along with his son namely Sunny was going to Vishnupad Temple for worship on 09.06.2019, petitioner along with other accused persons reached there and attacked the informant's son. Co-accused Anil Yadav also attacked him with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20174 of 2020(3) dt.20-07-2020 2/2 rod thereafter he fell down over the earth.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that there is specific allegation against co-accused Anil Yadav. He further submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his payer for bail is rejected in connection with Rampur P.S. Case No. 181 of 2019 from the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya.

Accordingly, the application is dismissed. However, petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T