Sanjay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47365 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2011 Thana- WAJIRGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

SANJAY YADAV Son of Sukhdeo Yadav Resident of Village-Nawdiha, P.S.-Wazirganj, (Tankuppa), District-Gaya.

2.

Rajesh Yadav Son of Sukhdeo Yadav Resident of Village-Nawdiha, P.S.- Wazirganj, (Tankuppa), District-Gaya.

3.

Ramdahin Yadav Son of Late Bhola Yadav Resident of Village-Nawdiha, P.S.-Wazirganj, (Tankuppa), District-Gaya.

4.

Rameshwar Yadav Son of Late Bhola Yadav Resident of Village-Nawdiha, P.S.-Wazirganj, (Tankuppa), District-Gaya.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR .. ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 17-10-2019 Although no one appears on behalf of the petitioner, learned APP for the State is present.

This Court has gone through the statements made in the application seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Wazirganj (Tankuppa) P.S. Case No. 93 of 2011 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

It appears from the first information report being Wazirganj (Tankuppa) P.S. Case No. 193 of 2011 dated 07.05.2011 that all these petitioners are named in the first information report. The allegations against these petitioners that they had come on a jeep and one of them started firing from his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47365 of 2019(3) dt.17-10-2019 2/2 rifle which hit the aunt of the informant and she fell down. Thereafter, indiscriminate firing were done on other persons. The aunt of the informant died after receiving the firearm injury. Learned APP for the State submits that the present case was lodged in the year 2011 and after 8 years now these petitioners have moved for grant of anticipatory bail. It is submitted that because the petitioners failed to submit themselves, the progress of the case has been arrested. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, considering that it is a case of the year 2011 and after 8 years these petitioners are moving for grant of anticipatory bail, this Court is not inclined to grant them privilege of anticipatory bail, their prayer is refused.

If the petitioners surrender and pray for regular bail within four weeks from today, their prayer for bail shall be considered by the learned court below on its own merit. The application stands disposed of.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/- U T