Pintu Yadav @ Rahul Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71869 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2021 Thana- BAKHTIYARPUR RAIL P.S. DistrictPatna ====================================================== Pintu Yadav @ Rahul Yadav, S/O Late Krishna Yadav, R/O VillageDayachak, P.S.- Barh, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Birendra Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 18-05-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects as pointed out by office within two weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in connection with G.R.P. Bakhtiarpur (Barh) P.S. Case No. 09 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 326, 353, 504 Indian Penal Code and 27 of Arms Act. He is in custody since 01.02.2021. The petitioner has got six criminal antecedent.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the prosecution story, this petitioner had upon seeing the police party fired which hit the informant on his chest causing serious injury to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71869 of 2021(2) dt.18-05-2022 2/2 him.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that the allegation of firing against the petitioner is false and concocted. It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody in connection with this case since 01.02.2021. Learned APP for the State is present and has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Having regard to the gravity of the offence alleged, the materials showing that this petitioner had upon seeing the police party fired which hit the informant on his chest causing serious injury and then the petitioner has got 6 criminal antecedents and a firearm with live cartridges have also been recovered from his house, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused. The application is dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.