Munna Yadav @ Dharmendra Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6695 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2020 Thana- ANGARGHAT District- Samastipur ====================================================== Munna Yadav @ Dharmendra Rai Son of Mithilesh Rai Resident of VillageRamu Tol Supaul, Dadhiya Asadhar, P.S.- Angarghat, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar No1, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 22-06-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in connection with Angarghat P.S. Case no. 27 of 2020 registered under sections 307, 333, 341, 342, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per allegation in the F.I.R., three named accused persons including the petitioner herein came to the shop of the petitioner and started to misbehave with the lady customer. It is further stated that on being asked to leave the shop by the informant, Munna Yadav and other accused persons started to abuse and assault the informant. Munna Yadav fired on the informant which missed. On other shop keepers having

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6695 of 2021(3) dt.22-06-2021 2/3 gathered, it is stated that the accused persons made an attempt to escape, however, accused Santosh Kumar was caught. On the police personnel reaching the place of occurrence the empty cartridge was handed over to them.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations as leveled in the F.I.R. are false and concocted. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. A minor altercation/dispute has been blown out of proportion and allegations of firing etc. has been manufactured to give the occurrence a serious look. No incriminating article has been recovered from the person or possession of the petitioner. No injuries was caused to any person. The petitioner is in custody since 9.6.2020 and there being no progress in the learned Court below, there is no chance of the trial concluding in the near future.

The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.

Case diary as also report with respect to the stage of trial was called for from the learned Court below. As per report received, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 25.8.2020 and 1.5.2021 was the date fixed for framing of charge.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6695 of 2021(3) dt.22-06-2021 3/3 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in view of the direct allegations against the petitioner, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail for the present and the same rejected.

Taking into consideration the facts of the case, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U T