Patna High CourtCR. MISC./5615/2021rejected

Munarik Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2021-08-03Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5615 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-426 Year-2018 Thana- SHERGHATI District- Gaya ====================================================== MUNARIK YADAV Son of Meghan Yadav Resident of Village- Mohandih, P.S.- Dobhi, District- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gajendra Kumar Singh,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Nirmala Kumari,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 03-08-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within four weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Nirmala Kumari, learned APP for the State.

The petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in connection with Sherghati (Dobhi) P.S. Case No. 426 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 448, 307, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per the prosecution story, this petitioner had pressed three bullets onto the chest of the injured Vikash Kumar. The injury report corroborates the allegation against the petitioner. He is the sole assailant and has got 10 criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5615 of 2021(5) dt.03-08-2021 2/2 antecedents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner is in custody since 03.12.2019. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Considering the gravity of the offence alleged, the specific allegation and the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. The prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

Let the trial be expedited.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.