Sanjay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49812 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -77 Year- 2005 Thana -KHIJARSARAI District- GAYA ====================================================== Sanjay Yadav, S/o Sri Ramjee Yadav, R/o Village- Sheikh Bigha, P.S.- Khizar- Sarai, District- Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Yashpal Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 22-02-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 326, 332, 333, 307, 302, 353 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of Arms Act, Sections 3 and 4 of Explosive Substance Act and Section 17 of Criminal Law Amendment Act.

It is alleged that on the date of occurrence, the miscreants fired upon police party as a result of which two police personnel, namely, Gopal Sharma and Vijendra Singh died on the spot and the police constable Uday Kumar and Ramchandra Chauhan sustained injury and they were taken to hospital for treatment. This petitioner and along with other accused persons

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49812 of 2016 (5) dt.22-02-2017 2/2 fired on the police party. Learned Additional and Sessions JudgeVIII, Gaya has mentioned in the impugned order that petitioner was absconding since 2005 and process under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C was also issued against him and thereafter he was remanded in this case from other case.

In such circumstances, there is serious allegation against this petitioner of making firing on police party upon which two police personnel died and he is absconding since long times. Therefore, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is hereby rejected. The petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months, if no substantive progress is made in the trial.

(Sanjay Priya, J.) ravi/- U T