Md. Eido @ Eid Mohammad @ Edo v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67477 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2023 Thana- JOGBANI District- Araria ====================================================== Md. Eido @ Eid Mohammad @ Edo, son of Md. Abbas, village- Khajurbari W.No-13, Ps- Jogbani Dist- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 17-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No. 87/2023, lodged on 06.04.2023 under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged against three named accused persons including the petitioner with an allegation of causing gun-shot injury to the brother of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The specific allegation of causing gun-shot injury is against coaccused, Md. Lal whereas the petitioner is also alleged to have fired, but it did not hit anyone. The petitioner is in custody since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67477 of 2023(2) dt.17-10-2023 2/2 25.07.2023 and the petitioner is accused in two more criminal cases, in both the cases, he is on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedents which must be taken into consideration while considering the prayer for bail.
6. In the present facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No. 87/2023, pending before the learned ACJM-V, Araria is hereby rejected.
8. However, the trial Court is directed to release the petitioner on bail by imposing its own condition so that the petitioner may not evade appearance during trial, if he renews his prayer for bail after framing of charge.
9. With this observation, the bail application stands disposed of.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Ashwini/- U T