← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./53340/2015bail granted

Vijay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2016-02-09Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53340 of 2015 (3) dt.09-02-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.53340 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -455 Year- 2014 Thana -SUPAUL District- SUPAUL ====================================================== Vijay Yadav, son of Shri Bechan Yadav, Resident of Village- Garh Baruari, Tola- Kataiya, P.S and District Supaul.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Pd.(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 455 of 2014 registered under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The allegation of informant is that, on 08.10.2014, he was sitting at his door and heard sound of his younger brother, Tejnarayan Yadavm then he rushed there and saw that Bechan Yadav was assaulting to him. When the informant made protest then Shiv Kumar Yadav gave threatening to him and this petitioner shot fire at the informant causing injury to the left side of his chest.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53340 of 2015 (3) dt.09-02-2016 petitioner and the informant are Patidar and there is land dispute between them due to that reason this petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Moreover, it would appear from the injury report as detailed in paragraph 39 of the case diary that while the two firearm injuries communicate to each was found on the person of the informant but that is simple in nature. The petitioner is in custody since 28.07.2015.

Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul, in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 455 of 2014. Out of two sureties, one surety must be the close relative of the petitioner.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T