Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6036/2016rejected

Dhananjay Yadav @ Dhananjay @ Chhotu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2016-04-05Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6036 of 2016 (3) dt.05-04-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6036 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -271 Year- 2015 Thana -KHAZANIHAT District- PURNIA ======================================================

1. DHANANJAY YADAV @ DHANANJAY @ CHHOTU YADAV Son of Late Rabindra Yadav, Resident of Village - Maranga, P.S. K. Hat (Maranga), District - Purnea. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sahin Begum(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 05-04-2016 Heard learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the Sate.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with K. Hat (Sahayak) P.S. Case No. 271 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he and another co-accused being armed dragged the brother of the informant from the shop and the petitioner, shot the brother of the informant, resulting he became injured and thereafter, the associates of the petitioner chased the brother of the informant and opened fire causing his death.

Submission is of false implication and that in this case several other co-accused have been allowed bail and the petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6036 of 2016 (3) dt.05-04-2016 is suffering in custody since 13.07.2015.

Learned APP seriously opposes by submitting that multiple injuries have been found on the person of the deceased and the petitioner is the first assailant and further he has got criminal antecedent as he is involved in nine more cases. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T