Pashupati Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29515 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -69 Year- 2016 Thana -PARWATTA District- KHAGARIA ====================================================== Pashupati Yadav, Son of Late Shivnandan Yadav, Resident of VillageSalarpur, P.S.- Parbata, District- Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri S. Ehteshamuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No.69 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 447, 307/34 of I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

It is alleged that while the informant along with his father was cutting wheat crop in his field, this petitioner and other co-accuseds armed with lathi and rifle reached and made indiscriminate firing causing injury to his father. It has been submitted that the allegation of causing firearm is omnibus and no offence under Section 307 of I.P.C. is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29515 of 2018 (3) dt.29-06-2018 made out as the injured has sustained injury on his leg which is not vital part of the body. He is in custody since 14.11.2017 and so he deserves bail.

The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the submission.

From perusal of the F.I.R. and the case-diary, it appears that this petitioner on the date of occurrence went towards the land of the informant and made indiscriminate firing causing injuries on the informant and his father. The doctor has reported the injuries sustained by the injured as grievous in nature caused by firearm. Besides that the petitioner is at litigating term for land dispute and is accused in two more criminal cases. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer of bail is accordingly rejected.

(Sanjay Kumar, J) Harish/- U