Patna High CourtCR. MISC./49381/2021rejected

Pramod Kumar Yadav @ Pramod Yadav @ Pramod Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2022-03-29Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49381 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2021 Thana- RAJAPAKAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== PRAMOD KUMAR YADAV @ PRAMOD YADAV @ PRAMOD SINGH S/o- RAMJANM SINGH, Resident of Village- Kashipur, P.S.- Rajapakar (Barati O.P.), District- Vaishali at Hajipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Yashraj Bardhan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh, APP Mr.Parashuram Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 29-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Rajapakar (Barati O.P.) P.S. Case No.118 of 2021 registered under Section 307 and other minor sections of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to personal grudge. It is further submitted that no occurrence took place as alleged in the F.I.R.

Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail by contending that the petitioner is the main assailant. It is further submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49381 of 2021(2) dt.29-03-2022 2/2 that specific allegation of assaulting the informant's father with sword is against the petitioner which caused head injury and the same is supported by the injury report. Therefore, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

Having considered the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected. Harish/- (Arvind Srivastava, J) U T