Naveen Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8369 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2020 Thana- KHIRI MORE District- Patna ====================================================== NAVEEN YADAV S/o Laxuman Yadav @ Laxmi Singh R/O Village - Taranpur, P.S. and P.O. - Khiri More, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Chhaya Kirti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ravindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-07-2021 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 Khiri More P.S. Case no. 11 of 2020 registered under sections 307, 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 353, 332, 333, 216, 337, 338 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the F.I.R., it is stated by the informant that on receiving information about the whereabouts of the petitioner, who was an absconding accused involved in different cases, it is stated that he was taken into custody. However, soon thereafter, large number of persons variously armed started to assault the police personnel and facilitated the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8369 of 2021(3) dt.08-07-2021 2/3 escape of the petitioner from police custody. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations as levelled in the F.I.R. are false and concocted. With respect to his antecedents, it is submitted that in two of the cases he was enlarged on anticipatory bail. The cases were lodged because of land dispute with one Anil Kumar Pandey. All the other co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Court below. The petitioner is in custody since 20.8.2020.

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

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on going through the materials on record, it transpires that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner was being searched for in a number of cases pending against him. Inspite of being taken into custody, with the assistance of the other accused persons he escaped on 31.1.2020. and continued to abscond till he was arrested in one another case and remanded in this case on 20.8.2020.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8369 of 2021(3) dt.08-07-2021 3/3 application is rejected.

The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Spd/- (Partha Sarthy, J) U T