Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26234 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2017 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran ====================================================== Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Prasad S/O Shri Ram Jee Prasad R/O Village At Madhopur Chhota, P.S- Taraiya, Distt.- Saran At Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Satyendra Narayan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 31-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 302, 307, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3/4 of Explosive Act and Sections 25(1-b), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act. Allegation against the co-accused persons along with this petitioner is that they committed murder of the informant's grand mother and grand father. It is further alleged that this petitioner hurled bomb at the place of occurrence but no one seriously injured from that bomb according to prosecution version.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26234 of 2023(3) dt.31-07-2023 2/2 falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that there is no specific overt of opening fire against the petitioner. It is also submitted that from perusal of the postmortem report, doctor opined that the cause of death of the deceased is due to firearm. Nothing concrete evidence has come against the petitioner. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 17.11.2022. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as custody of the petitioner, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No. 30 of 2017 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge, XIth Saran at Chapra. (Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Shubham/- U T