Sanjay Yadav @ Chonga v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38222 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-243 Year-2019 Thana- VISHNUPAD District- Gaya ====================================================== SANJAY YADAV @ CHONGA Son of Keshar Yadav Resident of VillageGhugharitand Chatubigha, P.S.- Vishnupad, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

M/s Rama Kant Sharma, Sr. Advocate Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

For the Informant :

M/s Shiva Shankar Sharma Arun Kumar Sinha, Advocates ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 16-03-2021 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in connection with Vishnupad P.S. Case no. 243 of 2019 registered under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 27 of the Arms Act.

As per allegation in the first information report, the petitioner is stated to have shot the elder brother of the informant.

It is submitted by learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that from perusal of the first information report itself the improbability of the allegations is writ large on the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38222 of 2020(4) dt.16-03-2021 2/3 face of the F.I.R. in so far as the genesis of the occurrence is concerned there was no panchayati in the village, the occurrence is stated to have taken place right in front of the house of the petitioner and four persons accompanying the petitioner are stated to have caught hold of the deceased when the petitioner fired upon him. It is further submitted that the postmortem report does not support the allegations levelled in the first information report and at the place of occurrence, no blood stain etc. has been found. The petitioner is in custody since 17.12.2019.

The application for bail is opposed by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant who submits that the trial in case has already proceeded and the informant would be examining the witnesses at the earliest.

A report was called for from the learned court below with respect to the stage of trial and as per the report contained in letter dated 19.2.2021, two prosecution witnesses have been examined.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the petitioner is stated to be the assailant of the deceased and the trial in the case has proceeded,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38222 of 2020(4) dt.16-03-2021 3/3 the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the same is rejected.

The learned court below is directed to expedite the trial.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Spd/- U T