Vibhas Yadav @ Raybhal Yadav @ Raiful Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63715 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2021 Thana- SANHAULA District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== VIBHAS YADAV @ RAYBHAL YADAV @ RAIFUL YADAV S/o Late Wakil Yadav R/o Village- Tarar, P.S.- Sanhaula, Distt- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md. Najmul Hodda, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akbar Ali, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 04-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 15.05.2022 in connection with Sanhaulla P.S. Case No. 56 of 2021, F.I.R. dated 03.06.2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 447, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is that in the night of 02.06.2021 at about 08:00 P.M. some altercation took place between the informant and the petitioner, who happens to be own brothers and in course thereof the petitioner opened fire on the informant and the bullet hit in the right side of his stomach

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63715 of 2022(6) dt.04-07-2023 2/3 and thereafter he was brought to Mayaganj Hospital, Bhagalpur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and due to land dispute he has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that there was no intention to kill the informant rather the accidently firing has been made and hence no case is made out under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the trial is going on and out of eight chargesheeted witnesses, four witnesses have already been examined and the informant has not identified the petitioner and in his examination he has stated that due to land dispute the petitioner has been implicated in the present case. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one.

Considering the aforesaid facts that the trial is going on and out of eight chargesheeted witnesses, four witnesses have already been examined, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Sanhaulla P.S. Case No. 56 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M. XI, Bhagalpur. Prayer is refused.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63715 of 2022(6) dt.04-07-2023 3/3 However, the learned Trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T