← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./63966/2019bail rejected

Vinod Kumar Upadhyay v. The State Of Bihar

2019-10-21Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63966 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2019 Thana- GORIAKOTHI District- Siwan ====================================================== VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY, aged about 35 years, Male, Son of Rajdeo Upadhyay, Resident of Village - Khagani, P.S.- Goreyakothi, District- Siwan ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sachida Nand Rai, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 21-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state.

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Goreyakothi P.S. Case No. 80 of 2019, pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan, registered under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation is that at about 08.30 p.m. on 06.05.2019, informant, Mintu Kumar Upadhaya, along with his father, Ravindra Upadhaya, was in the way, at that time, due to land dispute, nine persons named in the first information report, including the petitioner, attacked at Ravindra Upadhaya. Informant, any how, managed to flee away raising alarm and after short interval when returned there with villagers, then,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63966 of 2019(2) dt.21-10-2019 2/2 found his father in pool of blood.

Submission is that while the petitioner, named in the first information report, along with others, but, no specific overt act has been attributed against him.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. The prayer for prearrest bail is rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below and seek regular bail, which will be considered on its own merit and without being prejudiced of this order.

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