Patna High CourtCR. MISC./47200/2021dismissed

Manoj Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2021-09-01Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47200 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2019 Thana- SHANKARPUR DistrictMadhepura ====================================================== Manoj Yadav Son of Nago Yadav @ Nageshwar Yadav Resident of VillageLaxmipur Chandi Asthan, P.S.- Kumar Khand, District- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Dr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 01-09-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through video conference. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an undertaking that all defects pointed out by the stamp reporter shall be removed, and compliance with the conditions of the notices of this Court with regard to acceptance of e-filing shall be made, without delay immediately upon resumption of normal physical functioning of the Court, and in any event within one month thereof.

2. The petitioner, who is in custody since 10.01.2020, has renewed his prayer for bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 85 of 2021 arising out of Shankarpur P.S. Case No. 166 of 2019 for the offences alleged under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, having earlier been rejected by order dated 02.02.2021 in Cr. Misc. No. 36892 of 2020.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47200 of 2021(2) dt.01-09-2021 2/2

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates his earlier submission to the effect that the petitioner has been falsely implicated for allegedly having fired upon the informant causing injury.

4. Learned APP appears and has been heard.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, in the absence of any material change in circumstance, this Court is not inclined to take a different view of the matter for grant of bail to the petitioner at this stage. The bail petition stands dismissed.

6. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T