Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44611/2018disposal with observation

Madari Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2018-09-04Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44611 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -95 Year- 2018 Thana -GAYA KOTWALI District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Madari Yadav Son of Raudi Yadav Resident of Village- Moh Bangla Asthan, P.S. Kotwali, Districty- Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 04-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Kotwali P. S. Case No. 95 of 2018 registered for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307 and 302 IPC.

Allegation against the petitioner and other accused person is of assault to the husband of the informant with lathi and danda and iron rod, causing injury and he died during course of treatment .

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and as a matter of fact the petitioner has been made accused in the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44611 of 2018 (3) dt.04-09-2018 2/2 present case due to land dispute and allegations against the petitioner is general and omnibus and the petitioner is in custody since 16.04.2018.

Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer for bail stating that total 22 injuries were found on the person of the deceased according to post mortem report.

Having hear both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above as well as criminal antecedent of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail to the petitioner with a further direction to the lower court to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of six months from the receipt/ production of a copy of this order of this court, if not concluded, and there is no latches on the part of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of trial Court. With the aforesaid observation, the instant petition is disposed of.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T