Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37879/2020bail rejected

Shiv Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2021-03-02Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37879 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2019 Thana- LAUKAHA District- Madhubani ====================================================== Shiv Kumar Yadav, S/O Manohar Yadav, Resident Of Village - Barkor, P.S. - Laukaha, District - Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Hriday Narayan Harshit, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Madhura Nand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 02-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Laukaha P.S. Case No.152 of 2019, corresponding to G.R. No.957 of 2019, for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 186, 224, 225, 353, 332/34 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jhanjharpur, District-Madhubani.

There is an allegation that while the police party went to arrest an accused in connection with another case, the petitioner along with some others have frustrated the arrest and allowed the accused to flee away and have tried to snatch the Government arms of the police personnel.

This Court had earlier called for the case diary.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37879 of 2020(3) dt.02-03-2021 2/2 The petitioner's counsel submits that there is no specific allegation attributed against the petitioner. He has fair antecedents and is in custody since 23.07.2020. Learned APP for the State has drawn attention of the Court towards the materials collected during the course of investigation, from which it is evident that the police personnel have sustained injuries and the accused persons have facilitated in fleeing away of the accused.

Considering the rival submissions, this Court, for the present, is not inclined to allow the prayer for bail. The same is rejected.

This Court would expect that the petitioner's counsel would honour his undertaking in the instant proceedings regarding supply of the requisite court fee etc. within two weeks from the date he is called upon to do so by the office. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) PNM U T