Uday Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39865 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2023 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Uday Kumar Son Of Dinanath Singh Village Rahimpur, Ps Bidupur District Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shrishti Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dashrath Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 21-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, some unknown miscreants fired upon the husband of the informant, while informant, her husband and children were going to the house of her brother-inlaw.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and the same has been lodged against unknown persons. The name of the petitioner has come into light, on the basis of confessional

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39865 of 2023(3) dt.21-08-2023 2/2 statement of co-accused Shailesh Kumar, which has got no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. There is no specific overt act of firing against the petitioner and no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He further submitted that the other co-accused has already been granted bail by this Bench vide order dated 28.07.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43924 of 2023. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition. He is languishing in judicial custody since 20.03.2023.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 35 of 2023.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) arish/- U T