Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37148/2023dismissed

Mantu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-21Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37148 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2022 Thana- RAJGIR District- Nalanda ====================================================== MANTU YADAV son of LALO YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGECHAMARDIH, PS- RAJGIR, DISTRICT- NALANDA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Chandra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramesh Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-07-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 08.05.2022 in connection with Rajgir P.S. Case No. 252/22 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147/148/149/323/325/ 337/338/ 341/342/504/506/302/307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, he petitioner and others are said to have assaulted the deceased on account of land dispute.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not the author of the fatal injuries. Two injuries have been found on the front and one stitch wound has also been found. He further submits that though the petitioner is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37148 of 2023(2) dt.21-07-2023 2/2 said to have assaulted the deceased on the backside of his head, but there is no injury on the back side of the head and therefore, the petitioner deserves the privilege of bail.

5. Learned counsel for the informant Shri Shivjee Singh has submitted that the petitioner and others have assaulted the deceased and it is not possible for any eye-witness to assign particular role as to who has assaulted on what part of the body and whose assault had accused the injury.

6. In these circumstances, this application is grant of bail is rejected at this stage.

7. The trial is directed to be expedited.

8. The petitioner may renew his prayer for bail if there is no sufficient progress in the trial.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Saif/- U T