Uday Kumar Sharma @ Uday Mistri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51122 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2011 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Uday Kumar Sharma @ Uday Mistri Son of Budhan Mistri Resident of Village- Garwaiya, P.S.- Barachatti, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shashank Shekhar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Narsingh Tanti ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-07-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 290 of 2011, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147/149/341/323/325/307 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegedly all the FIR named accused persons, including the petitioner, assaulted the informant due to which he has sustained serious injury.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that admittedly no specific allegation has been attributed to the petitioner and only on account of village politics, the name of 17 accused persons have been implicated in this case without assigning any role to them. As the petitioner had been working

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51122 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026 2/2 outside the State and the police had assured that after proper investigation there is every chances that they shall not be sent for trial, hence the delay has occurred in approaching the Court.

5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner has been evading his arrest for the last 15 years, besides in the said incidence two persons have sustained grievous injury.

6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that the petitioner has been evading his arrest for the last 15 years, though he is named in the FIR with an allegation of causing assault to the injureds along with other persons, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail to the petitioner stands rejected.

7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court below, preferably within a period of four weeks from today, his prayer for bail shall be considered without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Harish Kumar, J) Anjani/- U T