Pintu Yadav @ Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.87 of 2017 (3) dt.02-03-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.87 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -102 Year- 2015 Thana -RAJAULI District- NAWADA ====================================================== Pintu Yadav @ Pintu Kumar S/o late Vijay Yadav R/o- Vill- Bhaur, P.S. Rajauli, Distt- Nawada.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nagendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 02-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Rajauli P.S. Case No. 102 of 2015 instituted for the offence under sections 452, 326, 307 and 398 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

It is alleged that on the date of occurrence while the informant was sleeping in the night at 11 P.M., he heard a sound and felt that some dacoit has entered in his house. The informant heard the sound of his son who was also sleeping in his room. The co-accused Santosh Yadav, caught him and having pointed pistol, demanded key of the box, but the son of informant refused, as a result whereof, he was assaulted. The informant was going to

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.87 of 2017 (3) dt.02-03-2017 save his son then one Pintu Yadav pointed pistol on him. The informant made protest then he was assaulted by butt of pistol on his head, causing head injury. Thereafter, he fired on his chest due to which he fell down. The learned Sessions Judge has mentioned the injury report in para 46 of the case diary. The doctor has found gun shot injury on the person of the informant and the opinion with regard to nature of injury was kept reserved. In this manner, there is specific allegation against this petitioner.

In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Sanjay Priya, J) Ravi/- U T