Vinay Yadav @ Vinay Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27087 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-286 Year-2019 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura ====================================================== VINAY YADAV @ VINAY KUMAR YADAV Son of Parmanand Yadav Resident of Village - Garua, tola- Bhatgama, Police Station- Chousa, District - Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Uday Chand Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 06-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceedings. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within stipulated period, office will place the matter before the Bench. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under section 147, 148, 149, 448, 323, 324, 307, 354, 379, 435, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code and section 27 of Arms Act.
Allegedly, the petitioner alongwith other co-accused persons attacked upon the house of the informant with intention to kill. All the accused persons entered in the house of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27087 of 2022(2) dt.06-09-2022 2/3 informant and assaulted them and set the house on fire. On protest, the petitioner and one Laltu Yadav fired shots with three nuts, which hit on the left hand of one Sulekha Devi. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation leveled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is an admitted land dispute between the parties. The allegation of firing is not consistent with the injury report. The injury report of Sulekha Devi shows the injuries are caused by hard and blunt substance and no injury caused by firing has been found. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent, which is also mentioned in para-3 of the bail application.
Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27087 of 2022(2) dt.06-09-2022 3/3 the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in Chausa P.S. Case No.286 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T