Pawan Kumar Yadav @ Pawan Kr. Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39654 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-532 Year-2020 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== Pawan Kumar Yadav @ Pawan Kr. Yadav Son of Mahesh Yadav Resident of Village- Harni, P.S.- Khaira, District- Jamui. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prabhat Ranjan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Addl. Public Prosecutor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner seeks bail in Khaira P.S. Case No. 532 of 2020, registered for the offence under Section 307 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act, Section 4 / 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and Sections 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 of the U.A.P. Act. As per the prosecution case, on 20.12.2020, four unknown miscreants came at the construction site and demanded extortion and took away mobile phones of Prayag Sah and Ghanshyam Singh. Thereafter, on 22.12.2020, 15-20 unknown miscreants came at the site and threw bomb, damaged the Poklain machine and assaulted informant and other workers with pipe, as a result of which, the informant and Prayag Sah became injured. The miscreants also threatened to kill the workers, if the work will restart.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39654 of 2021(3) dt.28-02-2022 2/2 It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that name of the petitioner transpired during course of investigation and till date, he has not been put on T.I.Parade. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 26.02.2021.
However, learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the bail petition and submitted that during course of investigation, it has come that out of three mobile phones from which extortion money was demanded, one mobile phone has been recovered from the possession of this petitioner and petitioner has got criminal antecedent also.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and same is, accordingly, rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T