Sanjay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43204 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-381 Year-2021 Thana- LAXMIPUR District- Jamui ====================================================== SANJAY YADAV Son of Suffal Yadav Resident of Village - Maghi, P.S.- Laxmipur, District - jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailesh Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anant Kumar 1, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 29-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects within four weeks.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for offence punishable u/s 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 506 of the IPC and 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3⁄4 of Explosive Act. Allegedly, the accused persons named in F.I.R. including the petitioner hurled two bombs on the house of the informant. They also opened fired with an intention to kill the family members of informant.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. No such

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43204 of 2022(2) dt.29-11-2022 2/2 occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner rather allegation are general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that prior to this occurrence the husband of the informant attacked on petitioner's brother by throwing bomb and therefore Jhajha P.S. Case No. 18/2019 was lodged against the husband of the informant by the petitioner side. Therefore to create pressure upon the petitioner this case has been lodged falsely. No one of informant side sustained any injury. Learned counsel for petitioner further submitted that similar situated coaccused has been granted anticipatory bail in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 34379/2022 vide dated 10.11.2022. Petitioner has eight criminal antecedents.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, since the petitioner has eight criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to enlarge him on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T