Patna High CourtCR. MISC./40043/2020dismissed

Pankaj Yadav @Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2021-03-24Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40043 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2020 Thana- ARA MUFFSIL District- Bhojpur ====================================================== PANKAJ YADAV @GUDDU YADAV @ GUDDU RAY Son of Late Narsingh Yadav Resident of Village- Daulatpur, P.S.- Ara Muffasil, DistrictBhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kamlesh Prasad Yadav, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satendra Narayan Singh, APP For the Informant : Mrs.Malti Kumari, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 24-03-2021 Heard the parties.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 342, 448, 323, 302, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case in brief is that the informant has given fardbeyan stating therein that he was painting the boundary wall at that time six accused persons alongwith the petitioner came there and they were giving filthy words against the informant. Then the informant side said that you do not take scuffle but accused persons caught hold of informant's brother and fired upon him as a result of which he died in P.M.C.H., Patna.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40043 of 2020(3) dt.24-03-2021 2/2 case. The petitioner and the informant are agnates. There is contradiction statement of the informant and the mother of deceased. The petitioner is in jail custody since 07.06.2020. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent which is mentioned in para 3 of the bail petition.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail petition and submits that the petitioner is main assailant and the postmortem report has supported the prosecution case. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected in connection with Ara Muffasil P.S. Case No. 177/2020 from the Court of learned C.J.M., Bhojpur at Ara.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

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