Anil Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33342 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2022 Thana- SONO District- Jamui ====================================================== ANIL YADAV Son of Mahendra Yadav Resident of village-Bhithra, Police Station-Sono, District-Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sharwan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Fahimuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 21-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner, in the present case, is seeking prearrest bail in connection with Sono (Charka Pathar) P.S. Case No.41 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 324, 325, 326, 447, 307, 302, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.
3. As per the prosecution story, the allegation against the petitioner is that he had fired from his pistol upon the informant and thereafter he along with co-accused Sheso Yadav assaulted him with piece of stone as a result whereof he died on the spot.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33342 of 2023(2) dt.21-07-2023 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to previous enmity. Learned counsel submits that there is no specific allegation of assault against the petitioner.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. There being specific allegation that this petitioner fired from his pistol upon the informant and thereafter he along with co-accused Sheso Yadav assaulted him with piece of stone as a result whereof he died on the spot, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. His prayer is refused.
7. In case the petitioner surrenders and prays for regular bail in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, his prayer for regular bail shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.
8. This application is dismissed.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U T