Uday Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37647 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-474 Year-2019 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria ====================================================== UDAY YADAV S/o Late Guletan Yadav @ Bhuletan Yadav Resident of Village- Tartar Umesh Nagar, P.S.- Muffasil, District-Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.B.N.Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 09-02-2021 Heard both sides.

The petitioner seeks bail in Khagaria(Muffasil) P.S. Case No.474 of 2019 registered under Sections 447, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The informant alleged that on 27.06.2019, there was some verbal altercation between her son Ramprit Kumar and Adhik Yadav, the son of the petitioner(Uday Yadav). Some verbal exchanges were also made between the members of two families but on 29.06.2019, again Dharmveer Yadav, Adhik Yadav, Karmveer Yadav, Shanti Devi and Uday Yadav(the petitioner) having armed with firearms came and made indiscriminate firing. In the firing made by the petitioner, the informant got injury on her leg and Adhik Yadav fired causing injury on the right leg of Savitri Devi, the sister-in-law of the informant.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37647 of 2020(2) dt.09-02-2021 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that informant alleged that she was treated in Khagaria Sadar hospital but from perusal of the injury report, it would appear that informant and her sister-in-law were treated by a private doctor in Begusarai. The informant got injuries on her leg but the injuries are opined to be simple in nature. The sister-in-law of the informant got grievous injury and the author of the injury is Adhik Yadav. Petitioner is in jail since 23.05.2020 but it appears that petitioner has got criminal antecedent and this fact has not been mentioned in para 3 of the bail petition.

There is specific allegation that petitioner made indiscriminate firing causing injury on the leg of the informant but since the fact with regard to criminal antecedent of the petitioner is concealed at the first instance while filing bail petition although this fact has been mentioned in the ordersheet itself, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. The petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after remaining three months in custody from today.