Madan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.46505 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -164 Year- 2017 Thana -BELAGANJ District- GAYA ======================================================
1. Madan Yadav son of Ramotari Yadav Resident of Village - Dalelchak, Police Station - Belaganj, District - Gaya.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Rajeev Nayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 22-09-2017 Heard both sides.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Belaganj P.S. Case No. 164/2017, registered for the offences punishable under Section 307 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that the accused persons were constructing house and the projectile was extended over the land of the informant for that the dispute arose. Sadan Yadav assaulted her with bricks caused injury on her left eye. Madan Yadav, petitioner is alleged to have fired causing injury on the left hand of Urmila Devi, mother-in-law of the informant.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly on account of land dispute and construction of house both the parties entered into scuffle. From the side of the petitioner
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46505 of 2017 (2) dt.22-09-2017 2/2 Belaganj P.S. Case No. 163/2017 was registered. The doctor found the injury, on the hand of Urmila Devi, simple in nature. Both sides entered into compromise and the compromise petition is also filed, which is annexed as Annexure-3 of this bail petition, but it appears that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he opened fire causing firearm injury on the left hand of Urmila Devi. Of course, the injury is simple in nature, but I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.
Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, above named, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Rakhi U T