Anil Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35966 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2023 Thana- BARH District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Anil Yadav S/O- Chotan Yadav Village- Hasanchak P.S.- Barh Dist- Patna 2.
Sonu Kumar S/O- Shivlal Yadav Village- Hasanchak P.S.- Barh Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 24-06-2023 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
3. The petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Barh P.S. Case No. 52 of 2023 dated 23.01.2023, lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 379, 506 & 504 of the I.P.C. read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
4. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against six named accused persons including the present petitioner against whom, the allegation of robbery and committing the offence of firing is also there by which, two persons were injured.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35966 of 2023(2) dt.24-06-2023 2/3
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioner no. 1 is the order giver. Counsel further submits that the antecedent of the petitioner no. 1 is clean and both the petitioners are in custody since 24.01.2023. Counsel submits that against petitioner no. 2, there is allegation of firing is there but this allegation is general and omnibus in nature. Counsel submits that there is one antecedent of the petitioner no. 2 in which he is on bail.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that charge-sheet has already been filed in this case and petitioners are ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon them by the Court.
7. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R. against whom, the specific allegation of dacoity and indiscriminate firing are there.
8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at present and, therefore, their bail petition is hereby rejected.
9. But liberty is hereby granted to the petitioners that they may renew their prayer for bail after framing of charge and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35966 of 2023(2) dt.24-06-2023 3/3 the Trial Court is directed to release them on bail thereafter, imposing its own conditions, so that they may not evade their appearance during trial.
10. With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.) sadique/- U T