Mahesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.21927 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -128 Year- 2016 Thana -SHEKHPURA District- SEKHPURA ======================================================
1. Mahesh Yadav Son of late Rameshwar Yadav Resident of VillageDanibigha, P.S. Shekhpura, District- Shekhpura. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Sharma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant : Mr. Brajesh Kumar Gupta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 21-06-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Shekhpura (Kusumbha) P.S. Case No. 128/16, registered for offences punishable under Sections 326, 307, 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner's name has surfaced in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused and though informant has also named this petitioner in para -22 of the case diary but he too has not named him as an assailant and except that there is nothing against him. Petitioner has been in custody since 24.01.2017. Heard learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for the informant. They have opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that petitioner himself has
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21927 of 2017 (3) dt.21-06-2017 2/2 confessed his guilt in para 78 of the case diary and apart from that informant has also said in para 56 of the case diary that he has identified the petitioner by his voice and further petitioner also has criminal antecedent, as such, he does not deserve the privilege of bail.
Having heard both sides, considering the fact that petitioner himself has confessed his guilt coupled with the fact petitioner has criminal antecedents and also he has been named by other co-accused of this case, as such, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, his application for regular bail is, accordingly, rejected.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it as early as possible.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T